Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38761089›Full record

ArticleThe Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry2024

Determining the future role of clinical practice guidelines: The experience of Australia and New Zealand.

S Kisely, H Herrman, S Chamoli, D Hemachandra, S Lawn, L Bajurny, N Wright, G Mellsop

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

S KiselyThe Princess Alexandra Hospital Southside Clinical Unit, Faculty of Medicine, the University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4021-2924
H HerrmanOrygen, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
S ChamoliBi-national Faculty of Adult Psychiatry Committee, The Royal Australian & New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP), Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1495-8282
D HemachandraDepartment of Psychiatry, Canberra Health Services, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
S LawnLived Experience Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
L BajurnyPolicy, Practice, and Research, The Royal Australian & New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP), Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0009-0002-8241-337X
N WrightPolicy, Practice, and Research, The Royal Australian & New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP), Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
G MellsopDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, the University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been recent discussion in Australia and New Zealand concerning the utility of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) and the role of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) in their development. The College Board therefore established a Steering Group (SG) to oversee an exploration of options and produce recommendations about contemporary approaches to the development of high-quality evidence-based clinical practice guidance for psychiatry. This paper outlines the SG's conclusions and recommendations, as well as the underlying methods and reasoning. In particular, we discuss best practice and recent developments in the synthesis of research evidence. Account has been taken of the opportunities offered by digital technologies, the proliferation of clinical evidence and awareness of the gains to be made by increased inclusion of lived-experience perspectives. It is recommended that the broader concept of best practice resources (BPRs) as now emphasised in so many fields of service is the most appropriate starting point for the College's role in this area especially as the expertise of the College and its fellows lends itself to the development of a range of BPRs. In conclusion, contemporary guidance needs to be tailored to the requirements of the practitioners seeking it, to articulate the real-world needs and experiences of patients, and to be delivered in a contemporary format that is responsive to rapidly emerging evidence. The experience in Australia and New Zealand may have implications elsewhere for the development of CPGs and BPRs more broadly.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicPsychiatryAustraliaEvidence-Based MedicineHumansNew ZealandSocieties, Medicalclinical practiceContemporary guidanceevidence communicationevidence synthesisRANZCP guidelines

Identifiers

PMID38761089
PMCPMC11370169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.