Article type
Abstract
Background: Limited skills in clinical practice guideline (CPG) development may affect trustworthiness of CPGs. Within the Global Evidence, Local Adaptation (GELA) project, we offered various activities to guideline development groups (GDGs) and steering group (SG) members in Nigeria, Malawi, and South Africa to build their capacity to read, interpret, and use evidence and to actively participate in the guideline development process.
Aim: To assess guideline development capacity needs, knowledge, skills, and behavior of GELA GDG and SG members over time.
Methods: Guided by the Kirkpatrick model to evaluate training, we developed an online questionnaire comprising demographic data; capacity development needs; and guideline development knowledge, skills, and behavior. For knowledge and skills, we used the theoretical framework and competency-based approach to training in guideline development to develop questions and asked participants to rate their confidence in these skills. For behavior, we adapted questions from a validated tool to assess evidence-informed decision-making competence and asked participants to indicate how often they engage in certain behaviors. We invited GELA GDG and SG members to complete the online surveys at baseline and at midterm. Patients were not involved in this study; however, they will directly benefit from trustworthy CPGs.
Results: At baseline, 50 (Malawi: 13, Nigeria: 22, South Africa: 15) GDG and SG members completed the RedCap survey. Confidence in knowledge and skills differed between countries. In Malawi and Nigeria, most respondents had little to no confidence across skills, including appraising and interpreting evidence from systematic reviews (SRs), describing and interpreting GRADE Summary of Findings (SOFs) tables, participating in the evidence-to-recommendation process, and qualitative evidence synthesis (QES). In South Africa, most respondents had average to high confidence in most skills except for appraising SRs, describing and interpreting GRADE SOFs tables, and finding QES. Training needs expressed matched respondents’ level of confidence in specific skills. Midterm data collection and analysis to assess change in knowledge, skills, and behavior is ongoing and will be presented at the GES.
Conclusion: At baseline, most GDG and SG members lacked necessary knowledge and skills for guideline development. Follow-up surveys will determine whether capacity-building activities have impacted their capabilities in the long-term.
Aim: To assess guideline development capacity needs, knowledge, skills, and behavior of GELA GDG and SG members over time.
Methods: Guided by the Kirkpatrick model to evaluate training, we developed an online questionnaire comprising demographic data; capacity development needs; and guideline development knowledge, skills, and behavior. For knowledge and skills, we used the theoretical framework and competency-based approach to training in guideline development to develop questions and asked participants to rate their confidence in these skills. For behavior, we adapted questions from a validated tool to assess evidence-informed decision-making competence and asked participants to indicate how often they engage in certain behaviors. We invited GELA GDG and SG members to complete the online surveys at baseline and at midterm. Patients were not involved in this study; however, they will directly benefit from trustworthy CPGs.
Results: At baseline, 50 (Malawi: 13, Nigeria: 22, South Africa: 15) GDG and SG members completed the RedCap survey. Confidence in knowledge and skills differed between countries. In Malawi and Nigeria, most respondents had little to no confidence across skills, including appraising and interpreting evidence from systematic reviews (SRs), describing and interpreting GRADE Summary of Findings (SOFs) tables, participating in the evidence-to-recommendation process, and qualitative evidence synthesis (QES). In South Africa, most respondents had average to high confidence in most skills except for appraising SRs, describing and interpreting GRADE SOFs tables, and finding QES. Training needs expressed matched respondents’ level of confidence in specific skills. Midterm data collection and analysis to assess change in knowledge, skills, and behavior is ongoing and will be presented at the GES.
Conclusion: At baseline, most GDG and SG members lacked necessary knowledge and skills for guideline development. Follow-up surveys will determine whether capacity-building activities have impacted their capabilities in the long-term.