Article type
Abstract
"Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) play a crucial role in healthcare decision-making, yet integrating values and preferences into guideline development remains challenging. Existing guideline development manuals offer guidance on this aspect, but a comprehensive review is needed to evaluate their methodologies, identify challenges, and propose strategies for improvement.
Objectives: This systematic review aims to assess methodological approaches regarding the integration of values and preferences in existing CPGs development manuals. The objectives include evaluating guidance principles, identifying challenges, and suggesting methodological improvements to enhance the incorporation of values and preferences in guideline development.
Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was implemented across five databases and relevant medical association websites to identify guideline development manuals published until July 7, 2023. Eligible studies were screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data extraction and synthesis, independently conducted by two researchers, focused on methods for integrating values and preferences, stakeholder engagement, patient selection, the impact of values and preferences on recommendations.
Results: Among the 77 manuals included in the final analysis, 37 (48%) explicitly mentioned values and preferences. Six of these (16%) emphasized the importance of considering values and preferences from populations other than patients, such as the public, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and clinical physicians in the panel. Five manuals (14%) described strategies for managing differences in values and preferences among different groups. Seven manuals (19%) outlined specific methods for obtaining values and preferences, including literature reviews, one-on-one interviews, focus group meetings, online surveys, and consultations with patient groups. Two manuals (6%) addressed the content to be included in questionnaire design, while ten (29%) discussed the impact of values and preferences on identifying clinical issues. Additionally, 28 manuals (76%) mentioned the influence of values and preferences on forming recommendation opinions.
Conclusions: This systematic review provides insight into the integration of values and preferences into the development of CPGs. It highlights the various methods used and challenges faced, emphasizing the need for improvement. The review proposes providing specific guidance on how to integrate values and preferences into each step of guideline development in the future."
Objectives: This systematic review aims to assess methodological approaches regarding the integration of values and preferences in existing CPGs development manuals. The objectives include evaluating guidance principles, identifying challenges, and suggesting methodological improvements to enhance the incorporation of values and preferences in guideline development.
Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was implemented across five databases and relevant medical association websites to identify guideline development manuals published until July 7, 2023. Eligible studies were screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data extraction and synthesis, independently conducted by two researchers, focused on methods for integrating values and preferences, stakeholder engagement, patient selection, the impact of values and preferences on recommendations.
Results: Among the 77 manuals included in the final analysis, 37 (48%) explicitly mentioned values and preferences. Six of these (16%) emphasized the importance of considering values and preferences from populations other than patients, such as the public, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and clinical physicians in the panel. Five manuals (14%) described strategies for managing differences in values and preferences among different groups. Seven manuals (19%) outlined specific methods for obtaining values and preferences, including literature reviews, one-on-one interviews, focus group meetings, online surveys, and consultations with patient groups. Two manuals (6%) addressed the content to be included in questionnaire design, while ten (29%) discussed the impact of values and preferences on identifying clinical issues. Additionally, 28 manuals (76%) mentioned the influence of values and preferences on forming recommendation opinions.
Conclusions: This systematic review provides insight into the integration of values and preferences into the development of CPGs. It highlights the various methods used and challenges faced, emphasizing the need for improvement. The review proposes providing specific guidance on how to integrate values and preferences into each step of guideline development in the future."