Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines

J. Dik F Habbema, Timothy J. Wilt, Ruth Etzioni, Heidi Nelson, Clyde B. Schechter, William F. Lawrence, Joy Melnikow, Karen M. Kuntz, Douglas K. Owens, Eric J. Feuer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Clinical practice guidelines should be based on the best scientific evidence derived from systematic reviews of primary research. However, these studies often do not provide evidence needed by guideline development groups to evaluate the tradeoffs between benefits and harms. In this article, the authors identify 4 areas where models can bridge the gaps between published evidence and the information needed for guideline development applying new or updated information on disease risk, diagnostic test properties, and treatment efficacy; exploring a more complete array of alternative intervention strategies; assessing benefits and harms over a lifetime horizon; and projecting outcomes for the conditions for which the guideline is intended. The use of modeling as an approach to bridge these gaps (provided that the models are high-quality and adequately validated) is considered. Colorectal and breast cancer screening are used as examples to show the utility of models for these purposes. The authors propose that a modeling study is most useful when strong primary evidence is available to inform the model but critical gaps remain between the evidence and the questions that the guideline group must address. In these cases, model results have a place alongside the findings of systematic reviews to inform health care practice and policy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)812-818
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
Volume161
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2 2014

Fingerprint

Practice Guidelines
Guidelines
Health Policy
Early Detection of Cancer
Routine Diagnostic Tests
Colorectal Neoplasms
Breast Neoplasms
Delivery of Health Care
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Habbema, J. D. F., Wilt, T. J., Etzioni, R., Nelson, H., Schechter, C. B., Lawrence, W. F., ... Feuer, E. J. (2014). Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines. Annals of Internal Medicine, 161(11), 812-818. https://doi.org/10.7326/M14-0845

Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines. / Habbema, J. Dik F; Wilt, Timothy J.; Etzioni, Ruth; Nelson, Heidi; Schechter, Clyde B.; Lawrence, William F.; Melnikow, Joy; Kuntz, Karen M.; Owens, Douglas K.; Feuer, Eric J.

In: Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 161, No. 11, 02.12.2014, p. 812-818.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Habbema, JDF, Wilt, TJ, Etzioni, R, Nelson, H, Schechter, CB, Lawrence, WF, Melnikow, J, Kuntz, KM, Owens, DK & Feuer, EJ 2014, 'Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines', Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 161, no. 11, pp. 812-818. https://doi.org/10.7326/M14-0845
Habbema JDF, Wilt TJ, Etzioni R, Nelson H, Schechter CB, Lawrence WF et al. Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2014 Dec 2;161(11):812-818. https://doi.org/10.7326/M14-0845
Habbema, J. Dik F ; Wilt, Timothy J. ; Etzioni, Ruth ; Nelson, Heidi ; Schechter, Clyde B. ; Lawrence, William F. ; Melnikow, Joy ; Kuntz, Karen M. ; Owens, Douglas K. ; Feuer, Eric J. / Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines. In: Annals of Internal Medicine. 2014 ; Vol. 161, No. 11. pp. 812-818.
@article{6ecfd0705e5746b49e6f6f91715287be,
title = "Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines",
abstract = "Clinical practice guidelines should be based on the best scientific evidence derived from systematic reviews of primary research. However, these studies often do not provide evidence needed by guideline development groups to evaluate the tradeoffs between benefits and harms. In this article, the authors identify 4 areas where models can bridge the gaps between published evidence and the information needed for guideline development applying new or updated information on disease risk, diagnostic test properties, and treatment efficacy; exploring a more complete array of alternative intervention strategies; assessing benefits and harms over a lifetime horizon; and projecting outcomes for the conditions for which the guideline is intended. The use of modeling as an approach to bridge these gaps (provided that the models are high-quality and adequately validated) is considered. Colorectal and breast cancer screening are used as examples to show the utility of models for these purposes. The authors propose that a modeling study is most useful when strong primary evidence is available to inform the model but critical gaps remain between the evidence and the questions that the guideline group must address. In these cases, model results have a place alongside the findings of systematic reviews to inform health care practice and policy.",
author = "Habbema, {J. Dik F} and Wilt, {Timothy J.} and Ruth Etzioni and Heidi Nelson and Schechter, {Clyde B.} and Lawrence, {William F.} and Joy Melnikow and Kuntz, {Karen M.} and Owens, {Douglas K.} and Feuer, {Eric J.}",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
day = "2",
doi = "10.7326/M14-0845",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "161",
pages = "812--818",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines

AU - Habbema, J. Dik F

AU - Wilt, Timothy J.

AU - Etzioni, Ruth

AU - Nelson, Heidi

AU - Schechter, Clyde B.

AU - Lawrence, William F.

AU - Melnikow, Joy

AU - Kuntz, Karen M.

AU - Owens, Douglas K.

AU - Feuer, Eric J.

PY - 2014/12/2

Y1 - 2014/12/2

N2 - Clinical practice guidelines should be based on the best scientific evidence derived from systematic reviews of primary research. However, these studies often do not provide evidence needed by guideline development groups to evaluate the tradeoffs between benefits and harms. In this article, the authors identify 4 areas where models can bridge the gaps between published evidence and the information needed for guideline development applying new or updated information on disease risk, diagnostic test properties, and treatment efficacy; exploring a more complete array of alternative intervention strategies; assessing benefits and harms over a lifetime horizon; and projecting outcomes for the conditions for which the guideline is intended. The use of modeling as an approach to bridge these gaps (provided that the models are high-quality and adequately validated) is considered. Colorectal and breast cancer screening are used as examples to show the utility of models for these purposes. The authors propose that a modeling study is most useful when strong primary evidence is available to inform the model but critical gaps remain between the evidence and the questions that the guideline group must address. In these cases, model results have a place alongside the findings of systematic reviews to inform health care practice and policy.

AB - Clinical practice guidelines should be based on the best scientific evidence derived from systematic reviews of primary research. However, these studies often do not provide evidence needed by guideline development groups to evaluate the tradeoffs between benefits and harms. In this article, the authors identify 4 areas where models can bridge the gaps between published evidence and the information needed for guideline development applying new or updated information on disease risk, diagnostic test properties, and treatment efficacy; exploring a more complete array of alternative intervention strategies; assessing benefits and harms over a lifetime horizon; and projecting outcomes for the conditions for which the guideline is intended. The use of modeling as an approach to bridge these gaps (provided that the models are high-quality and adequately validated) is considered. Colorectal and breast cancer screening are used as examples to show the utility of models for these purposes. The authors propose that a modeling study is most useful when strong primary evidence is available to inform the model but critical gaps remain between the evidence and the questions that the guideline group must address. In these cases, model results have a place alongside the findings of systematic reviews to inform health care practice and policy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84919469395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84919469395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.7326/M14-0845

DO - 10.7326/M14-0845

M3 - Article

VL - 161

SP - 812

EP - 818

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 11

ER -