Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.creatorAlonso-Coello, P. (Pablo)-
dc.creatorMartínez-García, L. (Laura)-
dc.creatorCarrasco-Gimeno, J.M. (José Miguel)-
dc.creatorSolà, I. (Iván)-
dc.creatorQureshi, S. (Safia)-
dc.creatorBurgers, J.S. (Jako S.)-
dc.date.accessioned2018-04-10T07:01:07Z-
dc.date.available2018-04-10T07:01:07Z-
dc.date.issued2011-
dc.identifier.citationAlonso-Coello et al.: The updating of clinical practice guidelines: insights from an international survey. Implementation Science 2011 6:107.es_ES
dc.identifier.issn1748-5908-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10171/50958-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have become increasingly popular, and the methodology to develop guidelines has evolved enormously. However, little attention has been given to the updating process, in contrast to the appraisal of the available literature. We conducted an international survey to identify current practices in CPG updating and explored the need to standardize and improve the methods. METHODS: We developed a questionnaire (28 items) based on a review of the existing literature about guideline updating and expert comments. We carried out the survey between March and July 2009, and it was sent by email to 106 institutions: 69 members of the Guidelines International Network who declared that they developed CPGs; 30 institutions included in the U.S. National Guideline Clearinghouse database that published more than 20 CPGs; and 7 institutions selected by an expert committee. RESULTS: Forty-four institutions answered the questionnaire (42% response rate). In the final analysis, 39 completed questionnaires were included. Thirty-six institutions (92%) reported that they update their guidelines. Thirty-one institutions (86%) have a formal procedure for updating their guidelines, and 19 (53%) have a formal procedure for deciding when a guideline becomes out of date. Institutions describe the process as moderately rigorous (36%) or acknowledge that it could certainly be more rigorous (36%). Twenty-two institutions (61%) alert guideline users on their website when a guideline is older than three to five years or when there is a risk of being outdated. Twenty-five institutions (64%) support the concept of "living guidelines," which are continuously monitored and updated. Eighteen institutions (46%) have plans to design a protocol to improve their guideline-updating process, and 21 (54%) are willing to share resources with other organizations. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to describe the process of updating CPGs among prominent guideline institutions across the world, providing a comprehensive picture of guideline updating. There is an urgent need to develop rigorous international standards for this process and to minimize duplication of effort internationally.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherBioMed Centrales_ES
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.subjectClinical practice guidelineses_ES
dc.subjectGuideline updatinges_ES
dc.subjectSurveyes_ES
dc.titleThe updating of clinical practice guidelines: insights from an international surveyes_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.description.noteThis article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.es_ES
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-107es_ES

Files in This Item:
Thumbnail
File
Carrasco_Implementation_2011.pdf
Description
Size
521.67 kB
Format
Adobe PDF


Statistics and impact

Items in Dadun are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.