ArticleClinical and public health guidelines2025
Development of Computable Guidelines: GIN McMaster Guideline Development Checklist Extension for Computable Guidelines.
Article in Clinical and public health guidelines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a GIN-McMaster Checklist Extension for Out-of-Hospital Health Guidelines: A Research Protocol.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2026Article
- Protocol for the Creation of the Guidelines International Network-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist Extension for Integrating Artificial Intelligence in the Guideline Enterprise (Guidelines-Artificial Intelligence Extension).Clinical and public health guidelines · 2025Article
- Opportunities and Challenges in Using Artificial Intelligence in Guideline Development and Implementation.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2025Article
- Development of Computable Guidelines: GIN McMaster Guideline Development Checklist Extension for Computable Guidelines.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2025Article
- Solving pain points in guideline development and implementation using human-centered design.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2025Article
- Database resources of the National Center for Biotechnology Information in 2025.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Transforming Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) recommendations into computer readable language is a complex and ongoing process that requires significant resources, including time, expertise, and funds. The objective is to provide an extension of the widely used GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist (GDC) and Tool for the development of computable guidelines (CGs). Methods: Based on an outcome from the Human Centered Design (HCD) workshop hosted by the Guidelines International Network North America (GIN-NA), a team was formed to develop the checklist extension. The team included guideline developers, researchers, implementers, and informaticists who reviewed the GDC and developed a list of additional requirements to help guideline developers author clearer, more implementable narrative guideline recommendations (referred to as knowledge level 1, or L1 recommendations) and ensure conformance-testable attributes of the different artifacts of clinical guideline recommendations. The team vetted this list with guideline development organizations and health informatics experts to validate it, for clarity, usability, and effectiveness. The team used an iterative process to determine the final extension components for CG development guidance. Results: The team identified 9 components that complement the topics included in GDC for developing, implementing, and adopting CG recommendations. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the defined principles in the L1 Checklist, grounded in current guideline development standards, may significantly enhance the writing, development, and implementation of computable recommendations. Collaboration among guideline developers, implementers, and informaticists from the outset is crucial for achieving effective integration of these guidelines into clinical workflows. Future work should focus on assessing this extension within various ongoing learning initiatives and point-of-care digitization efforts, including the scholarly communications ecosystem and learning health systems, to further improve healthcare delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.