Stakeholder perceptions of 'guidance and standards' for developing clinical practice guidance in Ireland.

IF 2.5 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Conor Hammersley, Waleed Serhan, Melissa K Sharp, Marion Cullinan, Barbara Clyne
{"title":"Stakeholder perceptions of 'guidance and standards' for developing clinical practice guidance in Ireland.","authors":"Conor Hammersley, Waleed Serhan, Melissa K Sharp, Marion Cullinan, Barbara Clyne","doi":"10.1332/17442648Y2025D000000059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical practice guidance (CPG) needs to be developed following robust standards that are acceptable to end users.</p><p><strong>Aims and objectives: </strong>This descriptive qualitative study aimed to explore stakeholder experiences and perceptions of standards for CPG development in Ireland.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>Twenty stakeholders (senior decision-makers, evidence synthesis specialists, healthcare providers and guideline developers) participated in semi-structured interviews, conducted remotely via Microsoft Teams between November 2023 to January 2024 by one interviewer. The topic guide was informed by a previous scoping review and an existing 2015 standards document. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis followed a framework approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Many participants recognised the value of having standards for CPG development but expressed limited familiarity with specific documents. They described a complex landscape of CPG development and use in Ireland, causing confusion due to ambiguous terminology and uncertainty regarding which guidance is required/takes precedence in various healthcare scenarios. Participants spoke to the importance of governance, particularly planning robust audit processes when developing CPGs. They also highlighted variation in CPG implementation and felt that those developing CPGs often failed to adequately consider implementation and communication planning. The need for more resources, particularly personnel like methodologists, to support developing evidence-based CPG was a recurring theme.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This qualitative study underscores stakeholders' appreciation of manuals and documents on developing CPG, yet it also highlights gaps in awareness and practical application. There is a pressing need for better promotion and dissemination of resources for development and implementation within the guidance development ecosystem.</p>","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":" ","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/17442648Y2025D000000059","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Clinical practice guidance (CPG) needs to be developed following robust standards that are acceptable to end users.

Aims and objectives: This descriptive qualitative study aimed to explore stakeholder experiences and perceptions of standards for CPG development in Ireland.

Methodology: Twenty stakeholders (senior decision-makers, evidence synthesis specialists, healthcare providers and guideline developers) participated in semi-structured interviews, conducted remotely via Microsoft Teams between November 2023 to January 2024 by one interviewer. The topic guide was informed by a previous scoping review and an existing 2015 standards document. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis followed a framework approach.

Results: Many participants recognised the value of having standards for CPG development but expressed limited familiarity with specific documents. They described a complex landscape of CPG development and use in Ireland, causing confusion due to ambiguous terminology and uncertainty regarding which guidance is required/takes precedence in various healthcare scenarios. Participants spoke to the importance of governance, particularly planning robust audit processes when developing CPGs. They also highlighted variation in CPG implementation and felt that those developing CPGs often failed to adequately consider implementation and communication planning. The need for more resources, particularly personnel like methodologists, to support developing evidence-based CPG was a recurring theme.

Discussion: This qualitative study underscores stakeholders' appreciation of manuals and documents on developing CPG, yet it also highlights gaps in awareness and practical application. There is a pressing need for better promotion and dissemination of resources for development and implementation within the guidance development ecosystem.

利益相关者对爱尔兰发展临床实践指导的“指导和标准”的看法。
背景:临床实践指南(CPG)需要按照最终用户可接受的健全标准制定。目的和目标:这一描述性定性研究旨在探讨利益相关者的经验和爱尔兰的CPG发展标准的看法。方法:2023年11月至2024年1月期间,20名利益相关者(高级决策者、证据综合专家、医疗保健提供者和指南开发者)参加了由一位采访者通过Microsoft Teams远程进行的半结构化访谈。该主题指南是由之前的范围审查和现有的2015年标准文件提供的。所有采访都有录音记录,并逐字抄写。数据分析采用框架方法。结果:许多参与者认识到制定CPG标准的价值,但对具体文件的熟悉程度有限。他们描述了爱尔兰CPG发展和使用的复杂情况,由于术语模糊和不确定需要哪些指导/在各种医疗保健方案中优先,导致了混乱。与会者谈到了治理的重要性,特别是在制定CPGs时规划健全的审计流程。他们还强调了CPG实施的差异,并认为制定CPG的国家往往未能充分考虑实施和沟通规划。需要更多的资源,特别是像方法学家这样的人员,来支持发展循证CPG,这是一个反复出现的主题。讨论:这一定性研究强调了利益相关者对发展CPG的手册和文件的赞赏,但它也强调了意识和实际应用方面的差距。迫切需要在指导发展生态系统内更好地促进和传播用于发展和执行的资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Evidence & Policy
Evidence & Policy SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
53
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信