Related Experiment Videos
Practice guidelines, a new reality in medicine. II. Methods of developing guidelines
1Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Washington, DC 20201.
Archives of Internal Medicine
|May 1, 1992
Summary
Developing practice guidelines involves various methods, from informal consensus to explicit, evidence-based approaches. Understanding these methods ensures higher quality, well-documented clinical practice guidelines.
Area of Science:
- Health Policy
- Medical Informatics
- Clinical Practice Guidelines
Background:
- Current practice guideline development methods vary significantly.
- Informal consensus is common but often yields low-quality, poorly documented guidelines.
- Systematic approaches are needed for reliable guideline creation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To outline and differentiate current methodologies for developing practice guidelines.
- To highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each guideline development approach.
- To detail the essential steps involved in creating robust practice guidelines.
Main Methods:
- Categorization of guideline development into informal consensus, formal consensus, evidence-based, and explicit methods.
- Description of the characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages of each method.
- Identification of key stages in the guideline development process, from topic selection to evaluation.
Main Results:
- Informal consensus is prevalent but lacks methodological rigor and quality.
- Formal consensus offers a systematic approach to expert opinion.
- Evidence-based and explicit development prioritize scientific evidence and patient preferences, respectively, for enhanced quality and transparency.
Conclusions:
- The choice of methodology significantly impacts the quality and reliability of practice guidelines.
- Evidence-based and explicit development methods represent more rigorous and transparent approaches.
- A systematic, multi-stage process is crucial for effective practice guideline development.