Community-based research - A framework for problem formulation: The case of upper endoscopy for gastroesophageal reflux disease

Mark Helfand, Megan A. Oehlke, David Lieberman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. To identify clinical hypotheses and information gaps underlying disagreement about the use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EGD) for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and to design a registry study to test these hypotheses. Design and setting. Structured group discussions with community-based practicing gastroenterologists. Results. Thirty-three gastroenterologists from 17 sites discussed a set of clinical scenarios concerning the use of EGD in GERD patients with different clinical histories. Clinicians identified patient characteristics and outcome variables missing from the original problem formulation. Using decision tables, the combinations of patient characteristics that provoked disagreement among clinicians were determined. The resulting decision tables specified which characteristics and outcome variables should be measured to test competing clinical theories of when to use EGD in patients with GERD. Subsequently, the clinicians conducted a practice-based study measuring uncertain variables associated with disagreement about the need for EGD in specific clinical situations. Conclusion. A structured, but flexible, approach to group discussion may help identify factors that are important in decision making and the hypotheses that should he addressed in resolving variations in practice styles. Technology assessors can use these methods to identify variables underlying clinicians' concerns about the clinical validity of recommendations about practice. This experience with eliciting patient characteristics and uncertain variables underscores the importance of involving practicing clinicians in the process and could be a useful model for problem formulation in guideline development and in community-based research.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)315-323
Number of pages9
JournalMedical Decision Making
Volume17
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1997

Fingerprint

Gastroesophageal Reflux
Endoscopy
Research Design
Research
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Registries
Decision Making
Guidelines
Technology
Gastroenterologists

Keywords

  • Decision-support techniques
  • Endoscopy
  • Gastroesophageal reflux
  • Gastrointestinal
  • Physician practice patterns
  • Practice guidelines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health Informatics
  • Health Information Management
  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

@article{9a906636f5ec4e1e94de28deb93fc77a,
title = "Community-based research - A framework for problem formulation: The case of upper endoscopy for gastroesophageal reflux disease",
abstract = "Objective. To identify clinical hypotheses and information gaps underlying disagreement about the use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EGD) for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and to design a registry study to test these hypotheses. Design and setting. Structured group discussions with community-based practicing gastroenterologists. Results. Thirty-three gastroenterologists from 17 sites discussed a set of clinical scenarios concerning the use of EGD in GERD patients with different clinical histories. Clinicians identified patient characteristics and outcome variables missing from the original problem formulation. Using decision tables, the combinations of patient characteristics that provoked disagreement among clinicians were determined. The resulting decision tables specified which characteristics and outcome variables should be measured to test competing clinical theories of when to use EGD in patients with GERD. Subsequently, the clinicians conducted a practice-based study measuring uncertain variables associated with disagreement about the need for EGD in specific clinical situations. Conclusion. A structured, but flexible, approach to group discussion may help identify factors that are important in decision making and the hypotheses that should he addressed in resolving variations in practice styles. Technology assessors can use these methods to identify variables underlying clinicians' concerns about the clinical validity of recommendations about practice. This experience with eliciting patient characteristics and uncertain variables underscores the importance of involving practicing clinicians in the process and could be a useful model for problem formulation in guideline development and in community-based research.",
keywords = "Decision-support techniques, Endoscopy, Gastroesophageal reflux, Gastrointestinal, Physician practice patterns, Practice guidelines",
author = "Mark Helfand and Oehlke, {Megan A.} and David Lieberman",
year = "1997",
doi = "10.1177/0272989X9701700308",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "315--323",
journal = "Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making",
issn = "0272-989X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Community-based research - A framework for problem formulation

T2 - The case of upper endoscopy for gastroesophageal reflux disease

AU - Helfand, Mark

AU - Oehlke, Megan A.

AU - Lieberman, David

PY - 1997

Y1 - 1997

N2 - Objective. To identify clinical hypotheses and information gaps underlying disagreement about the use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EGD) for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and to design a registry study to test these hypotheses. Design and setting. Structured group discussions with community-based practicing gastroenterologists. Results. Thirty-three gastroenterologists from 17 sites discussed a set of clinical scenarios concerning the use of EGD in GERD patients with different clinical histories. Clinicians identified patient characteristics and outcome variables missing from the original problem formulation. Using decision tables, the combinations of patient characteristics that provoked disagreement among clinicians were determined. The resulting decision tables specified which characteristics and outcome variables should be measured to test competing clinical theories of when to use EGD in patients with GERD. Subsequently, the clinicians conducted a practice-based study measuring uncertain variables associated with disagreement about the need for EGD in specific clinical situations. Conclusion. A structured, but flexible, approach to group discussion may help identify factors that are important in decision making and the hypotheses that should he addressed in resolving variations in practice styles. Technology assessors can use these methods to identify variables underlying clinicians' concerns about the clinical validity of recommendations about practice. This experience with eliciting patient characteristics and uncertain variables underscores the importance of involving practicing clinicians in the process and could be a useful model for problem formulation in guideline development and in community-based research.

AB - Objective. To identify clinical hypotheses and information gaps underlying disagreement about the use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EGD) for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and to design a registry study to test these hypotheses. Design and setting. Structured group discussions with community-based practicing gastroenterologists. Results. Thirty-three gastroenterologists from 17 sites discussed a set of clinical scenarios concerning the use of EGD in GERD patients with different clinical histories. Clinicians identified patient characteristics and outcome variables missing from the original problem formulation. Using decision tables, the combinations of patient characteristics that provoked disagreement among clinicians were determined. The resulting decision tables specified which characteristics and outcome variables should be measured to test competing clinical theories of when to use EGD in patients with GERD. Subsequently, the clinicians conducted a practice-based study measuring uncertain variables associated with disagreement about the need for EGD in specific clinical situations. Conclusion. A structured, but flexible, approach to group discussion may help identify factors that are important in decision making and the hypotheses that should he addressed in resolving variations in practice styles. Technology assessors can use these methods to identify variables underlying clinicians' concerns about the clinical validity of recommendations about practice. This experience with eliciting patient characteristics and uncertain variables underscores the importance of involving practicing clinicians in the process and could be a useful model for problem formulation in guideline development and in community-based research.

KW - Decision-support techniques

KW - Endoscopy

KW - Gastroesophageal reflux

KW - Gastrointestinal

KW - Physician practice patterns

KW - Practice guidelines

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030927175&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030927175&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0272989X9701700308

DO - 10.1177/0272989X9701700308

M3 - Article

C2 - 9219192

AN - SCOPUS:0030927175

VL - 17

SP - 315

EP - 323

JO - Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making

JF - Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making

SN - 0272-989X

IS - 3

ER -