Clinical and Public Health Guidelines最新文献

{"title":"Public Engagement to Inform Messaging Aligning With the Muscle-Strengthening Guidelines","authors":"Ashley Gluchowski","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70083","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Physical activity guidelines and their supplementary messaging play a fundamental role in raising awareness and increasing knowledge at a population level. In the United Kingdom, there are no national-level messaging campaigns accompanying the strength component of their physical activity guidelines for public health. Perhaps unsurprisingly, then, research indicates a very low awareness of and adherence to the strength component of these guidelines.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study used the Physical Activity Messaging Framework (PAMF) during a participatory workshop to inform messaging guidance aimed to accompany the UK's Chief Medical Officers' muscle-strengthening guidelines. We focused on a subgroup of middle-aged women. Twenty adults (<i>n</i> = 18 females) aged 40–60 years residing in the Greater Manchester area participated in one, 4-h, in-person workshop. Participants were in the contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance, or termination stage of the Transtheoretical Model of behaviour change. The focus group activities and resulting discussions aligned with the PAMF to identify message content, format, and delivery that resonated with the target audience.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results and Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Discussions revealed that it is simply not enough to tell people to do muscle-strengthening exercise (even when including information about frequency, muscle groups, or intensity) if we hope to increase self-efficacy, competence, or change behaviour. Individuals need more details on <i>how</i> to practically participate in muscle-strengthening exercise. Those who do not know how or who do not feel confident they know enough, simply will not start, revealing a clear enactment barrier. As a solution, participants proposed that future messaging campaigns include links to more detailed information on <i>how</i> to participate in muscle-strengthening exercise, practically and effectively. This is the first study to use the PAMF to develop messaging recommendations for (inter)national-level mass media campaigns aligned to the muscle-strengthening guidelines.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70083","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148696057","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Patient Involvement in the Development of Clinical Practice Guidelines – An Interview Study on the Experiences of Patients and Their Representatives in Germany","authors":"Clara Orduhan,&nbsp;Stefanie Pfisterer-Heise,&nbsp;Käthe Goossen,&nbsp;Jessica Breuing,&nbsp;Dawid Pieper","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70081","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70081","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Patient involvement (PI) in the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is recognized as a key aspect of trustworthy and high-quality CPGs. However, difficulties exist and PI is not yet consistently implemented in the development of CPGs. Our study aimed at exploring the experiences and perspectives of patients and their representatives regarding their involvement in CPG development processes and to unravel existing challenges.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with patient representatives who already participated in the development of a German evidence- and consensus-based CPG. The interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide developed a priori. They took place via the online meeting tool WebEx and were digitally recorded. The interview data was analyzed using qualitative content analysis as described by Mayring using MAXQDA.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In total, we conducted 23 interviews from November 2024 to February 2025. Participation in CPG development processes as active and contributing member of the guideline development group was emphasized as the dominating involvement strategy. For a positive PI experience, participants emphasized several influencing factors such as preparatory training, participation of other patient representatives, and appreciation from other guideline group members. Moreover, several challenges were anticipated for the future, for instance the recruitment of patients as well as the need for a more inclusive and diverse involvement.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our study found that overall participants were satisfied with the predominant involvement method of acting as participatory members in the guideline development group. Nevertheless, the findings also revealed certain unmet needs. Preparatory activities, such as targeted training sessions or meetings, were identified as essential and should become standard practice. To ensure equitable implementation, CPG developers should consider taking responsibility for preparing patient representatives to participate effectively, rather than relying on patient organizations for this.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70081","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148696058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Values and Preferences of People Living With Motor Neurone Disease (MND): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Timothy Hugh Barker,&nbsp;Lemma N. Bulto,&nbsp;Grace Holland,&nbsp;Camille Schubert,&nbsp;Tracy Merlin,&nbsp;Samer G. Karam,&nbsp;Wojtek Wiercioch,&nbsp;Danielle Pollock,&nbsp;Cindy Stern,&nbsp;Jay Beasley-Hall,&nbsp;Nipun Shrestha,&nbsp;Steve Vucic,&nbsp;Lynne Giles,&nbsp;Zachary Munn","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70080","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70080","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Aim</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To synthesise quantitative evidence on the values and preferences of people living with Motor Neurone Disease (MND), caregivers, and genetic carriers regarding health-related outcomes to inform the Australian MND Guideline.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A systematic review was conducted following Cochrane and GRADE guidance, informed by an <i>a priori</i> protocol. Major electronic databases (including MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL) and trial registries were searched to identify studies that met the eligibility criteria. Risk of bias of the studies that met the eligibility criteria was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Studies of Values and Utilities (ROBVALU) tool. Data on health state utility values were synthesised using meta-analysis where appropriate, while other quantitative data deemed inappropriate for meta-analysis were synthesised narratively. The certainty of the evidence for each outcome was assessed using the GRADE approach.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Twenty-four studies (<i>n</i> = 10,397) were included. Overall health-related quality of life (hrQoL) utility values for adults with MND varied significantly based on the regional preference set utilised (mean EQ-5D utility ranging from 0.57 in UK cohort (high certainty in the evidence) to 0.72 in Chinese cohorts (low certainty in the evidence). Utility values declined consistently with increasing disease severity across multiple staging systems, such as King's and MiToS. Narrative synthesis identified clear preferences across physical, psychosocial, and healthcare domains regarding both current and hypothetical treatment strategies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This review provides a comprehensive synthesis of the values and preferences of the broad MND community. This review has been conducted following rigorous best-practice methodology, to directly inform the selection and prioritisation of outcomes for the development of the Australian MND Guideline, ensuring the guideline adheres to a patient-centred approach. Standardisation of preference elicitation methods from the MND community, and the development of a core outcome set for future MND research are key future priorities.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70080","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148467134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The European Multidisciplinary Evidence-Based Guideline on Pancreatic Cancer: Methodological Protocol","authors":"Laura C. Leeuwenburgh,&nbsp;Magdalena Holze,&nbsp;Dena Akhoundzadeh,&nbsp;Adnan Alsourani,&nbsp;Ricardo Alvarez Jimenez,&nbsp;Paul C. M. Andel,&nbsp;Charlotte Baggerman van Houweninge,&nbsp;Alberto Balduzzi,&nbsp;Caro L. Bruna,&nbsp;Fabio Casciani,&nbsp;Alice Cattelani,&nbsp;Aniek E. van Diepen,&nbsp;Heleen Driessens,&nbsp;Daphne H. M. Droogh,&nbsp;Jeska A. Fritzsche,&nbsp;Eline van Gansewinkel,&nbsp;Luana Genova,&nbsp;Anne M. Gehrels,&nbsp;Gonzalo Gómez Dueñas,&nbsp;Riccardo Guastella,&nbsp;Lis S. M. Hoeijmakers,&nbsp;Tijs J. Hoogteijling,&nbsp;Ammar A. Javed,&nbsp;Berk Kaan Aktas,&nbsp;Benedict Kinny-Köster,&nbsp;Amber Lamoré,&nbsp;K. Seng Liem,&nbsp;Gabriella Lionetto,&nbsp;Lorenzo Lo Faro,&nbsp;Lisanne Lutter,&nbsp;Manuela Mastronardi,&nbsp;Carlo H. Maurer,&nbsp;Roberto Montorsi,&nbsp;Julian Musa,&nbsp;Ingmar F. Rompen,&nbsp;Jacobien C. M. Scheepens,&nbsp;Dana Sochorová,&nbsp;Thomas F. Stoop,&nbsp;Nuray Tezcan,&nbsp;Bas A. Uijterwijk,&nbsp;Roberta Vella,&nbsp;Federica Vernuccio,&nbsp;Rogier P. Voermans,&nbsp;Mohammad Abu Hilal,&nbsp;Volkan Adsay,&nbsp;Hana Algül,&nbsp;Valentina Ambrosini,&nbsp;Livia Archibugi,&nbsp;Eva Backman,&nbsp;Sorin T. Barbu,&nbsp;Ugo Boggi,&nbsp;Charlotte Borge-Andersen,&nbsp;Stefan Kobbelgaard Burgdorf,&nbsp;Alice Clarkson,&nbsp;Eric van Cutsem,&nbsp;Pieter-Jan Cuyle,&nbsp;Lois A. Daamen,&nbsp;Peter De Rosa,&nbsp;Marcel den Dulk,&nbsp;Celia Diez de los Rios,&nbsp;Amanda Drury,&nbsp;Irene Esposito,&nbsp;Simon M. Everett,&nbsp;Arantza Farina Sarasqueta,&nbsp;Isabella Frigerio,&nbsp;Bas Groot Koerkamp,&nbsp;Thilo Hackert,&nbsp;Florence Huguet,&nbsp;Nikolaos Kartalis,&nbsp;Anne Letsch,&nbsp;Pex Langenberg,&nbsp;Denny Levett,&nbsp;Gabor Liposits,&nbsp;Núria Malats,&nbsp;Hannah van Malenstein,&nbsp;Giuseppe Malleo,&nbsp;Zorana Maravic,&nbsp;Giovanni Marchegiani,&nbsp;Ana Martins,&nbsp;Martijn R. Meijerink,&nbsp;Christoph W. Michalski,&nbsp;J. Sven D. Mieog,&nbsp;Eleni Moka,&nbsp;Somnath Mukherjee,&nbsp;Cristina Nanni,&nbsp;Franco Orsi,&nbsp;Demetris Papamichael,&nbsp;Stefano Partelli,&nbsp;Cathy Payne,&nbsp;Ilaria Pergolini,&nbsp;Dejan Radenkovic,&nbsp;Keith J. Roberts,&nbsp;Roberto Salvia,&nbsp;Alain Sauvanet,&nbsp;Marta Scorsetti,&nbsp;Matthias Seebo,&nbsp;Thomas Seufferlein,&nbsp;Stefan Stättner,&nbsp;Geoffroy Vanbiervliet,&nbsp;Caroline S. Verbeke,&nbsp;Thomas Volk,&nbsp;Jens Werner,&nbsp;Johanna W. Wilmink,&nbsp;Marc Zins,&nbsp;Thierry Conroy,&nbsp;Per Pfeiffer,&nbsp;Michel Ducreux,&nbsp;Mahsoem Ali,&nbsp;Miranda Langendam,&nbsp;Yasaman Vali,&nbsp;Elena B. Rangelova,&nbsp;Marc G. Besselink,&nbsp;for the Multi-Societal European Evidence-Based Guideline on Pancreatic Cancer","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70074","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70074","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most lethal cancers despite extensive efforts and research conducted over the past decades. To effectuate groundbreaking improvements in pancreatic cancer treatment, interdisciplinary and international collaboration is essential. Evidence-based guidelines, including state-of-the-art evidence and expert opinion, are crucial to guide medical specialists, researchers, and patients, especially on issues where consensus is still lacking. This article describes the methodological protocol for the development of the European Multidisciplinary Evidence-Based Guideline on Pancreatic Cancer. The guideline aims to identify current knowledge gaps on pancreatic cancer management, develop questions based on these knowledge gaps, and answer these questions with evidence-based recommendations supplemented, when evidence is lacking, with expert advice for treatment and future research.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This guideline development protocol is developed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The process is structured into six stages: First, 13 theme-based multidisciplinary working groups are established, comprising representatives from 30 European medical and patient societies. Second, these working groups identify the most relevant current knowledge gaps on pancreatic cancer within their theme and formulate key questions. Third, the available evidence to answer these key questions is obtained through systematic reviews and the certainty of evidence is assessed using the GRADE approach. Fourth, recommendations are developed based on the available evidence. Fifth, all participants reach consensus on the recommendations through a modified Delphi process. Sixth, the recommendations are discussed during an open conference, including an external validation committee.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This methodological protocol of the European Multidisciplinary Evidence-Based Guideline on Pancreatic Cancer is designed to identify key knowledge gaps across 13 themes and formulate evidence-based recommendations. This guideline initiative unites 30 European medical and patient societies for pancreatic cancer.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70074","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148466886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Automation Into Living Guideline Development: A Scoping Review of Existing Frameworks, Methods, and Applications","authors":"Nofisat Ismaila,&nbsp;Syed Arsalan Ahmed Naqvi,&nbsp;Lawrence Mbuagbaw,&nbsp;Jinhui Ma,&nbsp;Lehana Thabane","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70079","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Artificial intelligence (AI) and automation offer opportunities to enhance the efficiency, timeliness, and sustainability of living guidelines (LGs). However, how AI and automation have been integrated into existing LG development frameworks remains unclear. This scoping review represents the first step in a broader programme of work aimed at developing a framework which aims to guide responsible and coordinated AI adoption across all phases of LG development.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To identify existing frameworks, methods, and approaches that integrate AI or automation into any stage of LG development.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted a structured search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Database for Systematic Review and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to March 12, 2026. We included peer-reviewed articles describing frameworks, models, or methods that applied AI or automation in the development of LGs. We extracted data into a standardised form, capturing study characteristics, AI methods, targeted guideline processes, and key findings and synthesised findings using a thematic narrative approach.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Of 1090 records identified, three studies met the inclusion criteria. The included studies described AI or automation applied to select components of the LG process, to support continuous evidence surveillance, to semi-automate study screening, and incremental updating of living systematic reviews. None addressed multiple stages of LG development in an integrated manner.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Current evidence demonstrates fragmented and narrowly focused AI or automation applications within LG development processes. Our findings highlight opportunities for future work to develop and evaluate more comprehensive frameworks that span multiple stages of the LG lifecycle.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70079","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148462836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Development and Updating of Clinical Practice Guidelines—The Necessity of International Collaboration","authors":"Johanna H. van der Lee,&nbsp;Irina M. Mostovaya,&nbsp;Johannes J. Duvekot,&nbsp;Robbert J. Ensink,&nbsp;Klaartje Spijkers,&nbsp;Margreet Pols,&nbsp;Teus A. van Barneveld","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70077","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70077","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Development and updating of clinical practice guidelines requires substantial resources. The Knowledge Institute of the Dutch Association of Medical Specialists has extensive experience in supporting the development of medical specialist guidelines in close partnership with the Netherlands Patient Federation, and is a long standing and active member of the Guidelines International Network. Based on the evaluation of an international pilot project in obstetrics, we propose a model for international collaboration: jointly identifying and prioritizing shared clinical questions, dividing the development of evidence summaries across countries, and exchanging these summaries so national guideline groups can develop context-specific considerations and recommendations. International collaboration can improve guideline quality, make optimal use of available scientific knowledge, and increase efficiency. With this paper, we call on guideline development organizations in other countries to collaborate in exchanging evidence summaries, so that all parties can benefit from more efficient guideline development.</p>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70077","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148282050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evidence-to-Decision Frameworks: Enhancing the Quality and Rigour of Guidelines and Recommendations","authors":"Jose F. Meneses-Echavez,&nbsp;Pablo Alonso-Coello,&nbsp;Gunn Vist,&nbsp;Javier Bracchiglione,&nbsp;Yang Song,&nbsp;Signe Flottorp,&nbsp;Sarah E. Rosenbaum","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70078","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;This commentary briefly describes the evolvement of guideline development, leading to the introduction of Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks. It then outlines key existing frameworks and summarises evidence on users' experiences. Finally, it discusses how EtD frameworks may contribute to improved guideline quality and reflects on future directions, including artificial intelligence.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Health guidelines consist of recommendations for improving health and well-being [&lt;span&gt;1, 2&lt;/span&gt;]. In the early 20th century, guidelines were largely based on expert opinion, with limited transparent consideration of the quality of the evidence [&lt;span&gt;3&lt;/span&gt;]. While the World Health Organisation (WHO) began issuing formal guidelines in 1977 [&lt;span&gt;4&lt;/span&gt;], the first guideline recognised as evidence-based was published in 1979 by the Canadian Task Force [&lt;span&gt;5&lt;/span&gt;]. These initiatives influenced the establishment of similar organisations worldwide, such as the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in 1984 [&lt;span&gt;6&lt;/span&gt;], and contributed to the development of evidence-informed guidelines by the WHO [&lt;span&gt;7&lt;/span&gt;], the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) [&lt;span&gt;8&lt;/span&gt;], and other health agencies [&lt;span&gt;7&lt;/span&gt;].&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Other advances in the late 20th century included the emergence of Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) in the 1990s [&lt;span&gt;9&lt;/span&gt;] and the establishment of Cochrane in 1993. In 2000, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) Working Group was founded. The first article describing GRADE's approach to grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations was published in 2004 [&lt;span&gt;10&lt;/span&gt;], followed by a series of methodological papers in the &lt;i&gt;British Medical Journal&lt;/i&gt; in 2008 targeting guideline developers and users [&lt;span&gt;11&lt;/span&gt;]. By 2007, WHO had already begun incorporating the GRADE approach into some of its guidelines [&lt;span&gt;7, 12&lt;/span&gt;]. By the 2010s, a rapid proliferation of guidelines was accompanied by increased concerns about conflicts of interest and demands for credibility. This accelerated the adoption of standards such as Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust [&lt;span&gt;13&lt;/span&gt;] and the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development [&lt;span&gt;14&lt;/span&gt;].&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This context sparked the use of frameworks to ensure all relevant criteria were systematically considered when moving from evidence to decisions, a process that ultimately led to the emergence of Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;EtD frameworks have become a central tool for bringing transparency and accountability to guidelines in the past two decades. Although they share common principles, they differ in their purpose, the criteria they include, and their areas of application.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The successful use of EtD frameworks depends not only on their design but also on how users experience them in practice [&lt;span&gt;49&lt;/span&gt;]. During deliberations, an experienced panel chair is vital to maint","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70078","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148174395","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist Extension for Integrating Artificial Intelligence in the Health Guideline Enterprise","authors":"Manuel Marques-Cruz,&nbsp;Bernardo Sousa-Pinto,&nbsp;Ignacio Neumann,&nbsp;Yuan Chi,&nbsp;Monika Nothacker,&nbsp;Artur Nowak,&nbsp;Marge Reinap,&nbsp;Mariette Awad,&nbsp;Pablo Alonso-Coello,&nbsp;Amir Qaseem,&nbsp;Elie A. Akl,&nbsp;Wojtek Wiercioch,&nbsp;Jan Brozek,&nbsp;Holger J. Schünemann,&nbsp;the GIN AI working group","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70073","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70073","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Artificial intelligence (AI) may support several processes of the health guideline enterprise. This article describes the development of an extension of the Guidelines International Journal (GIN)-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist (GDC) for integrating AI in the guideline enterprise. This development has been led by the GIN-AI Working Group.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We started by prompting a large language model (LLM) for items related to the use of AI in each of the steps of the original GDC. Subsequently, the members of the working group engaged in a set of iterative discussions, resulting in item refinement and in a consensus first version of the extension. We retrospectively applied this first version to a case use of guidelines incorporating AI in their development (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma [ARIA] 2024-2025 guidelines), leading to further refinement and to the approval of the final extension tool.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Prompting LLMs resulted in the generation of 149 items. Of those, 117 were removed and 19 were modified by members of the working group. On the other hand, 17 new items were added during the iterative discussion process. The retrospective application of the extension led to changes in the wording of four items. The final version of the checklist extension has been approved with 49 items modifying or adding to the original GDC.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We have developed an extension of the GIN-McMaster GDC that encompasses a set of conduct standards that are intended to facilitate the comprehensive and transparent integration of AI in the health guideline enterprise.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Clinical Trial Registration</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Not applicable. This study is not a clinical trial.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70073","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148174779","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Guidelines or Other Guidance Documents for Rare Diseases in the Netherlands: When and Where to Invest (Effort, Time and Money)?","authors":"Iméze J Hieltjes, Charlotte M W Gaasterland, Marieke Hermsen, Anne Marie van Wermeskerken, Ilse van Herk, Johanna H van der Lee","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70070","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gin2.70070","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Developing Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) is resource-intensive, making it essential to prioritise those CPG projects that are most needed. One of the rules pertains to prevalence, which excludes virtually all guideline development for rare diseases. Still, guidance is needed for their management. We discuss considerations pertaining to the decision to develop a CPG or another type of guidance document for a rare disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a consensus-based approach, an expert group developed a decision support flowchart to decide about the development of a clinical practice guideline or an alternative type of guidance document for rare diseases. An expert group of three guideline methodologists, a paediatrician, and two quality of care policy officers drafted an initial flowchart. The flowchart was reviewed and refined through three rounds of steering committee discussions in different settings, after which final adaptations were made.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The flowchart serves as a support tool to consider whether a CPG is the most suitable type of guidance document for addressing clinical challenges in a particular rare disease. Several alternatives may be more appropriate than developing a CPG, such as a local protocol, a care pathway, a didactic paper, or adolopment or adaptation of an international CPG illustrated by three conditions.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The proposed flowchart provides a framework to consider all relevant aspects around the choice for development of a guidance document or CPG. Although it results from the Dutch national situation and the rare disease field, it may also be applied in other countries and for more prevalent diseases. We encourage external validation and, if necessary, refinement of the flowchart. It supports strategic decision-making, ensuring that the efforts and resources needed for the development of CPGs or other guidance documents are focused on areas where they will have the greatest impact on medical specialist care.</p>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 3","pages":"e70070"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13563323/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148973054","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148077187","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}