Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocol

Introduction Due to a continuous emergence of new evidence, clinical guidelines (CGs) require regular surveillance of evidence to maintain their trustworthiness. The updating of CGs is resource intensive and time consuming; therefore, updating may include a prioritisation process to efficiently ensu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: García L.M., Pardo-Hernandez H., De Guzman E.N., Superchi C., Ballesteros M., McFarlane E., Penman K., Posso M., Figuls M.R., Sanabria A.J., Selva A., Vernooij R.W.M., Alonso-Coello P.
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2017
País:España
Institución:Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau)
Repositorio:r-IIB SANT PAU. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pau
OAI Identifier:oai:iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com:p10717
Acceso en línea:https://iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com/Publicaciones/ProdCientif/PublicacionFrw.aspx?id=10717
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85027062266&doi=10.1136%2fbmjopen-2017-017226&partnerID=40&md5=4e09f62783006f9937ab2d6977006b5a
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:clinical research
consensus
content analysis
ethics
feasibility study
hospital
human
medicine
practice guideline
quantitative study
semi structured interview
systematic review
evidence based medicine
health care delivery
questionnaire
standards
total quality management
Delivery of Health Care
Evidence-Based Medicine
Humans
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Quality Improvement
Surveys and Questionnaires
id ES_617b0da8195aeabcb930798d514b82d4
oai_identifier_str oai:iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com:p10717
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocolGarcía L.M.Pardo-Hernandez H.De Guzman E.N.Superchi C.Ballesteros M.McFarlane E.Penman K.Posso M.Figuls M.R.Sanabria A.J.Selva A.Vernooij R.W.M.Alonso-Coello P.clinical researchconsensuscontent analysisethicsfeasibility studyhospitalhumanmedicinepractice guidelinequantitative studysemi structured interviewsystematic reviewevidence based medicinehealth care deliveryquestionnairestandardstotal quality managementDelivery of Health CareEvidence-Based MedicineHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicQuality ImprovementSurveys and QuestionnairesIntroduction Due to a continuous emergence of new evidence, clinical guidelines (CGs) require regular surveillance of evidence to maintain their trustworthiness. The updating of CGs is resource intensive and time consuming; therefore, updating may include a prioritisation process to efficiently ensure recommendations remain up to date. The objective of our project is to develop a pragmatic tool to prioritise clinical questions for updating within a CG. Methods and analysis To develop the tool, we will use the results and conclusions of a systematic review of methodological research on prioritisation processes for updating and will adopt a methodological approach we have successfully implemented in a previous experience. We will perform a multistep process including (1) generation of an initial version of the tool, (2) optimisation of the tool (feasibility test of the tool, semistructured interviews, Delphi consensus survey, external review by CG methodologists and users and pilot test of the tool) and (3) approval of the final version of the tool. At each step of the process, we will (1) calculate absolute frequencies and proportions (quantitative data), (2) use content analysis to summarise and draw conclusions (qualitative data) and (3) draft a final report, discuss results and refine the previous versions of the tool. Finally, we will calculate intraclass coefficients with 95% CIs for each item and overall as indicators of agreement among reviewers. Ethics and dissemination We have obtained a waiver of approval from the Clinical Research Ethics Committee at the Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau (Barcelona). The results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journal and communicated to interested stakeholders. The tool could support the standardisation of prioritisation processes for updating CGs and therefore have important implications for a more efficient use of resources in the CG field. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved.BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP2017info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttps://iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com/Publicaciones/ProdCientif/PublicacionFrw.aspx?id=10717https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85027062266&doi=10.1136%2fbmjopen-2017-017226&partnerID=40&md5=4e09f62783006f9937ab2d6977006b5aBMJ OpenISSN: 20446055reponame:r-IIB SANT PAU. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pauinstname:Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau)Inglésinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com:p107172026-06-14T12:41:47Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocol
title Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocol
spellingShingle Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocol
García L.M.
clinical research
consensus
content analysis
ethics
feasibility study
hospital
human
medicine
practice guideline
quantitative study
semi structured interview
systematic review
evidence based medicine
health care delivery
questionnaire
standards
total quality management
Delivery of Health Care
Evidence-Based Medicine
Humans
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Quality Improvement
Surveys and Questionnaires
title_short Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocol
title_full Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocol
title_fullStr Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocol
title_full_unstemmed Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocol
title_sort Development of a prioritisation tool for the updating of clinical guideline questions: The UpPriority Tool protocol
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv García L.M.
Pardo-Hernandez H.
De Guzman E.N.
Superchi C.
Ballesteros M.
McFarlane E.
Penman K.
Posso M.
Figuls M.R.
Sanabria A.J.
Selva A.
Vernooij R.W.M.
Alonso-Coello P.
author García L.M.
author_facet García L.M.
Pardo-Hernandez H.
De Guzman E.N.
Superchi C.
Ballesteros M.
McFarlane E.
Penman K.
Posso M.
Figuls M.R.
Sanabria A.J.
Selva A.
Vernooij R.W.M.
Alonso-Coello P.
author_role author
author2 Pardo-Hernandez H.
De Guzman E.N.
Superchi C.
Ballesteros M.
McFarlane E.
Penman K.
Posso M.
Figuls M.R.
Sanabria A.J.
Selva A.
Vernooij R.W.M.
Alonso-Coello P.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv clinical research
consensus
content analysis
ethics
feasibility study
hospital
human
medicine
practice guideline
quantitative study
semi structured interview
systematic review
evidence based medicine
health care delivery
questionnaire
standards
total quality management
Delivery of Health Care
Evidence-Based Medicine
Humans
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Quality Improvement
Surveys and Questionnaires
topic clinical research
consensus
content analysis
ethics
feasibility study
hospital
human
medicine
practice guideline
quantitative study
semi structured interview
systematic review
evidence based medicine
health care delivery
questionnaire
standards
total quality management
Delivery of Health Care
Evidence-Based Medicine
Humans
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Quality Improvement
Surveys and Questionnaires
description Introduction Due to a continuous emergence of new evidence, clinical guidelines (CGs) require regular surveillance of evidence to maintain their trustworthiness. The updating of CGs is resource intensive and time consuming; therefore, updating may include a prioritisation process to efficiently ensure recommendations remain up to date. The objective of our project is to develop a pragmatic tool to prioritise clinical questions for updating within a CG. Methods and analysis To develop the tool, we will use the results and conclusions of a systematic review of methodological research on prioritisation processes for updating and will adopt a methodological approach we have successfully implemented in a previous experience. We will perform a multistep process including (1) generation of an initial version of the tool, (2) optimisation of the tool (feasibility test of the tool, semistructured interviews, Delphi consensus survey, external review by CG methodologists and users and pilot test of the tool) and (3) approval of the final version of the tool. At each step of the process, we will (1) calculate absolute frequencies and proportions (quantitative data), (2) use content analysis to summarise and draw conclusions (qualitative data) and (3) draft a final report, discuss results and refine the previous versions of the tool. Finally, we will calculate intraclass coefficients with 95% CIs for each item and overall as indicators of agreement among reviewers. Ethics and dissemination We have obtained a waiver of approval from the Clinical Research Ethics Committee at the Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau (Barcelona). The results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journal and communicated to interested stakeholders. The tool could support the standardisation of prioritisation processes for updating CGs and therefore have important implications for a more efficient use of resources in the CG field. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com/Publicaciones/ProdCientif/PublicacionFrw.aspx?id=10717
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85027062266&doi=10.1136%2fbmjopen-2017-017226&partnerID=40&md5=4e09f62783006f9937ab2d6977006b5a
url https://iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com/Publicaciones/ProdCientif/PublicacionFrw.aspx?id=10717
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85027062266&doi=10.1136%2fbmjopen-2017-017226&partnerID=40&md5=4e09f62783006f9937ab2d6977006b5a
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
publisher.none.fl_str_mv BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv BMJ Open
ISSN: 20446055
reponame:r-IIB SANT PAU. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pau
instname:Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau)
instname_str Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau)
reponame_str r-IIB SANT PAU. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pau
collection r-IIB SANT PAU. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pau
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869409419892097024
score 15,81155