Article type
Abstract
"Background: Involving interest holders in practice guideline development is proposed to increase relevance and uptake, while reducing health and social inequities. However, empirical evidence on the impact of engaging interest holders in guideline development has not been reviewed. Interest holders include people and groups whose interests should be considered in health research: health care providers, patients and caregivers, payers of health research, payers of health services, publishers, policymakers, researchers, product makers, program managers, and the public.
Objective: The objective of this review was to identify and synthesize empirical research on the impacts of engagement on the guideline development process.
Methods: This review is part of a series of four reviews conducted by the international MuSE Consortium and GRADE Stakeholder Involvement Working Group on engagement of interest holders in guideline development. A single comprehensive search strategy for all reviews was developed in consultation with medical librarians and included six databases and an extensive grey literature search. We included quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods primary studies. Eligible studies described specific impacts of engagement on the development of health guidelines using the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist which is composed of 18 topics outlining the practical steps of guideline development. To be included, studies had to report on specific impacts of engaging interest holders in the guideline development process.
Results: Across the four reviews, we screened 31,500 titles and abstracts and 730 full text articles. We included 17 studies in this review. The impacts of engagement were most often reported for topic selection and developing recommendations and determining their strength. Impacts were reported for patients, the public, health care providers, product makers, and editors of peer-reviewed journals. None of our included studies reported on the impacts related to the engagement of policymakers, program managers, researchers, payers of research, payers/purchasers of health services.
Conclusion: This review provides empirical evidence that engaging with interest holders in guideline development is impactful. Our findings, along with the other reviews in the series, were used to inform an engagement extension of the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist.
"
Objective: The objective of this review was to identify and synthesize empirical research on the impacts of engagement on the guideline development process.
Methods: This review is part of a series of four reviews conducted by the international MuSE Consortium and GRADE Stakeholder Involvement Working Group on engagement of interest holders in guideline development. A single comprehensive search strategy for all reviews was developed in consultation with medical librarians and included six databases and an extensive grey literature search. We included quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods primary studies. Eligible studies described specific impacts of engagement on the development of health guidelines using the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist which is composed of 18 topics outlining the practical steps of guideline development. To be included, studies had to report on specific impacts of engaging interest holders in the guideline development process.
Results: Across the four reviews, we screened 31,500 titles and abstracts and 730 full text articles. We included 17 studies in this review. The impacts of engagement were most often reported for topic selection and developing recommendations and determining their strength. Impacts were reported for patients, the public, health care providers, product makers, and editors of peer-reviewed journals. None of our included studies reported on the impacts related to the engagement of policymakers, program managers, researchers, payers of research, payers/purchasers of health services.
Conclusion: This review provides empirical evidence that engaging with interest holders in guideline development is impactful. Our findings, along with the other reviews in the series, were used to inform an engagement extension of the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist.
"