Methods used in adaptation of health–related guidelines: A systematic survey

Article type
Authors
Darzi A1, Torabiardakani K1, Song Y2, Amer Y3, Zhang Y1, Langaufová A4, Lotfi T1, Klugar M5, Alonso-Coello P6, Schünemann H1, Akl E7
1Mcmaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
2School of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China
33Pediatrics Department, Clinical Practice Guidelines and Quality Research Unit, Quality Management Department, King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
4Department of Health Sciences - Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Kamenice 753/5, 625 00 Brno, Czech Republic
5Cochrane Czech Republic, The Czech Republic: a JBI Centre of Excellence, Czech GRADE Network, Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic, Prague, Czech Republic
6Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano, Sant Antoni Maria Claret, 167, 08025 , Barcelona, Spain
7Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut , Beirut, Lebanon
Abstract
Background
Practice guideline development can be lengthy and resource consuming. Additionally, duplication of efforts contributes to research waste. Adaptation of guidelines provides an alternative solution by building on existing guideline efforts and considering contextual factors.

Objective
To identify, describe and evaluate the methods used in a select set of published adapted health related guidelines and to assess the reporting quality of these guidelines.

Methods
We searched MEDLINE (Ovid) and Embase (Ovid) from 2015 to March 29, 2023, to identify new adapted guidelines since the systematic survey published by Abdul Khalek et al. Eligible studies included adaptations of health–related guidelines. We did not restrict eligibility based on language. We excluded studies that described an adaptation framework but not an actual adaptation effort, meeting abstracts, studies that were local adaptation efforts for the purpose of implementation, studies appraising clinical practice guidelines for the purpose of adaptation or reporting only algorithms. Reviewers extracted data on the characteristics of the source guideline and adapted guideline, additional information on methods and tools used and resources required, and results of process including limitations and strengths. We also extracted data to assess the reporting quality of adapted guidelines using the RIGHT-Ad@pt checklist. All steps were done in duplicate and independently. We will conduct a descriptive analysis of all variables.

Results
In this update we screened 14,022 unique citations and identified 164 eligible studies.
Of those 149 were published in English and 15 in other languages. Currently, we have extracted 50% of studies and will have the results in time for the Global Evidence Summit.

Discussion
Our study will identify methods used for adaptation and the quality of reporting of health–related guideline adaptations. Furthermore, the results of this work are planned to inform the GIN-McMaster Guidelines Development Checklist extension for guideline adaptation.