Clinical and Public Health Guidelines最新文献

{"title":"","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148119284","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}

{"title":"","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148078620","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}

{"title":"","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148109452","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}

{"title":"Planetary Health in Health Guidelines: Expert Workshop Report 2024.","authors":"Pakeezah Saadat, Alina Herrmann, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto, Charlotte T J Michels, Denise Thomson, Emily Senerth, Grigorios Leontiadis, Jonathan Drew, Josep M Anto, Karolina Scahill, Klaas Miersch, Lorna Benton, Maria-Inti Metzendorf, Rafael José Vieira, Jean Bousquet, Holger Schünemann, Thomas Piggott","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70072","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gin2.70072","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health systems contribute to environmental degradation while simultaneously being affected by its consequences. Yet, planetary health considerations are largely absent from health guidelines. On November 6-7, 2024, the Planetary Health Expert Workshop convened over 50 experts from the GRADE Planetary Health Project Group at Humanitas University, Italy, to explore methods for embedding planetary health into health guideline development. Through presentations, case studies, and group discussions, participants identified key methodological gaps and proposed processes and tools to advance the integration of planetary health in health guidelines. Case studies highlighted the need to balance clinical effectiveness with long-term planetary impacts. This workshop demonstrates a strong interest in integrating planetary health considerations into health guidelines, ensuring evidence-based health recommendations are not only effective for individuals but also reduce planetary boundary transgressions, restoring Earth's natural systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 2","pages":"e70072"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13563350/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148973007","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 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148077775","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}

{"title":"Does It Really Take 17 Years for Clinical Trial Results to Reach Clinical Practice? A Meta-Research Protocol of the Evaluation of Trials Informing Recommendations","authors":"Brian S. Alper,&nbsp;Joanne Dehnbostel,&nbsp;Rachel Couban,&nbsp;Kenneth J. Wilkins,&nbsp;Karen A. Robinson,&nbsp;Harold Lehmann,&nbsp;Scientific Knowledge Accelerator Foundation","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70069","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>It has been estimated to take 17 years for research to change clinical practice. Scientific Knowledge Accelerator Foundation aims to narrow this research-practice gap, hypothesising that making scientific evidence computable will accelerate the pace of knowledge transfer. We designed this study to develop a reusable process for measuring the rate of knowledge transfer from clinical trials to practice guidelines to evaluate the effectiveness of our efforts in the years to come.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our study uses citation in clinical guidelines as a proxy for use of research in practice. We will evaluate a convenience sample of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), trace their citations in the clinical literature, and measure the length of time it takes for RCT results to be incorporated into recommendations for clinical practice. For each ‘index article’ in our convenience sample, we will record the date its results were publicly available (including preprint date and date of posting results in a registry, if applicable). Then, we will identify articles that cite the index article, sorting by date to find the earliest use of the RCT findings to inform an evidence-based recommendation for clinical practice. To qualify, these articles will meet three criteria: (1) systematically derived, (2) incorporating the RCT in the results section of the article and (3) making a recommendation intended to inform clinical practice. Review articles meeting the first two criteria will be checked for their use in subsequent generation of recommendations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study will develop a process to approach the question, ‘How long does it take for results of clinical trials to be incorporated into published systematically derived recommendations intended to guide clinical practice?’</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70069","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147683551","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":"Does It Really Take 17 Years for Clinical Trial Results to Reach Clinical Practice? A Meta-Research Protocol of the Evaluation of Trials Informing Recommendations","authors":"Brian S. Alper,&nbsp;Joanne Dehnbostel,&nbsp;Rachel Couban,&nbsp;Kenneth J. Wilkins,&nbsp;Karen A. Robinson,&nbsp;Harold Lehmann,&nbsp;Scientific Knowledge Accelerator Foundation","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70069","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gin2.70069","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>It has been estimated to take 17 years for research to change clinical practice. Scientific Knowledge Accelerator Foundation aims to narrow this research-practice gap, hypothesising that making scientific evidence computable will accelerate the pace of knowledge transfer. We designed this study to develop a reusable process for measuring the rate of knowledge transfer from clinical trials to practice guidelines to evaluate the effectiveness of our efforts in the years to come.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our study uses citation in clinical guidelines as a proxy for use of research in practice. We will evaluate a convenience sample of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), trace their citations in the clinical literature, and measure the length of time it takes for RCT results to be incorporated into recommendations for clinical practice. For each ‘index article’ in our convenience sample, we will record the date its results were publicly available (including preprint date and date of posting results in a registry, if applicable). Then, we will identify articles that cite the index article, sorting by date to find the earliest use of the RCT findings to inform an evidence-based recommendation for clinical practice. To qualify, these articles will meet three criteria: (1) systematically derived, (2) incorporating the RCT in the results section of the article and (3) making a recommendation intended to inform clinical practice. Review articles meeting the first two criteria will be checked for their use in subsequent generation of recommendations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study will develop a process to approach the question, ‘How long does it take for results of clinical trials to be incorporated into published systematically derived recommendations intended to guide clinical practice?’</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70069","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147683669","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":"Blood Activating and Stasis Removing Chinese Patent Medicine in Perioperative Period of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Myocardial Infarction: A Protocol for a Living Clinical Practice Guideline","authors":"Zumao Cao,&nbsp;Yongbo Wang,&nbsp;Xiaoyu Zhang,&nbsp;Lei Zhang,&nbsp;Zhicong Zeng,&nbsp;Fengxia Lin,&nbsp;Hairong Wang,&nbsp;Jingyu Huang,&nbsp;Chong Zou,&nbsp;Zhengan Bi,&nbsp;Yinghui Jin,&nbsp;Hongcai Shang,&nbsp;Romina Brignardello-Petersen","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70068","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gin2.70068","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Myocardial infarction (MI) remains a major global health burden, with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as the primary revascularization strategy. However, complications such as no-reflow, reperfusion injury and in-stent restenosis persist, requiring adjunctive therapies. Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), especially blood-activating and stasis-resolving Chinese patent medicine (CPM), is increasingly used in MI management.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To develop a living clinical practice guideline for the perioperative use of CPMs in the perioperative period of PCI for MI, based on rigorous and transparent methodology.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The guideline followed the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development, methods for developing integrated Chinese–Western medicine guidelines, and the living guideline framework. It will be reported in accordance with the RIGHT-TCM extension. Clinical questions and outcomes were framed, selected and rated through structured discussions with the Guideline Steering Committee and the Guideline Development Group. A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis will evaluate the efficacy and safety of CPM. The certainty of evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach, and recommendations will be formulated via the Evidence-to-Decision framework, incorporating benefits, harms, evidence certainty, feasibility and costs. When new clinical studies are included and critical outcomes' combined effect demonstrates directional or magnitude changes, the consensus and guideline development groups will jointly decide on new updates.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>By addressing key clinical uncertainties and leveraging real-time evidence updates, the guideline aims to enhance patient outcomes and support clinicians in decision-making.</p>\u0000 \u0000 <p><b>Trial Registration:</b> Guideline Registration Number: PREPARE-2024CN596</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70068","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147682902","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":"Blood Activating and Stasis Removing Chinese Patent Medicine in Perioperative Period of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Myocardial Infarction: A Protocol for a Living Clinical Practice Guideline","authors":"Zumao Cao,&nbsp;Yongbo Wang,&nbsp;Xiaoyu Zhang,&nbsp;Lei Zhang,&nbsp;Zhicong Zeng,&nbsp;Fengxia Lin,&nbsp;Hairong Wang,&nbsp;Jingyu Huang,&nbsp;Chong Zou,&nbsp;Zhengan Bi,&nbsp;Yinghui Jin,&nbsp;Hongcai Shang,&nbsp;Romina Brignardello-Petersen","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70068","DOIUrl":"10.1002/gin2.70068","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Myocardial infarction (MI) remains a major global health burden, with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as the primary revascularization strategy. However, complications such as no-reflow, reperfusion injury and in-stent restenosis persist, requiring adjunctive therapies. Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), especially blood-activating and stasis-resolving Chinese patent medicine (CPM), is increasingly used in MI management.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To develop a living clinical practice guideline for the perioperative use of CPMs in the perioperative period of PCI for MI, based on rigorous and transparent methodology.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The guideline followed the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development, methods for developing integrated Chinese–Western medicine guidelines, and the living guideline framework. It will be reported in accordance with the RIGHT-TCM extension. Clinical questions and outcomes were framed, selected and rated through structured discussions with the Guideline Steering Committee and the Guideline Development Group. A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis will evaluate the efficacy and safety of CPM. The certainty of evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach, and recommendations will be formulated via the Evidence-to-Decision framework, incorporating benefits, harms, evidence certainty, feasibility and costs. When new clinical studies are included and critical outcomes' combined effect demonstrates directional or magnitude changes, the consensus and guideline development groups will jointly decide on new updates.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>By addressing key clinical uncertainties and leveraging real-time evidence updates, the guideline aims to enhance patient outcomes and support clinicians in decision-making.</p>\u0000 \u0000 <p><b>Trial Registration:</b> Guideline Registration Number: PREPARE-2024CN596</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70068","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147683048","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":"EAES Clinical Practice Guideline 2026 Protocol: Multi-Society Recommendations for the Treatment of Achalasia","authors":"Bright Huo,&nbsp;Aaron J. Yu,&nbsp;Milos Bjelovic,&nbsp;Sofia Tsokani,&nbsp;Stephanie Sanger,&nbsp;Dimitris Mavridis,&nbsp;Gordon Guyatt,&nbsp;Stavros A. Antoniou","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70067","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70067","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Achalasia causes significant distress and quality-of-life impairment to patients. Several options exist for the treatment of achalasia including endoscopic [intra-sphincteric injection of botulinum toxin, pneumatic dilation, peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM)], and surgical techniques such as Heller Myotomy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This guideline will adhere to robust methodological standards according to GIN, GRADE, and AGREE-S. We will develop a clinical practice guideline addressing the treatment of patients with achalasia. A systematic review group will perform an evidence synthesis and network meta-analysis before appraising the certainty of evidence. An international, multidisciplinary panel will review the evidence and develop recommendations using the evidence-to-decision framework. The panel will be comprised of gastroenterologists, gastrointestinal surgeons, and patient partners. We will collect and address conflicts of interest for all guideline development group members. We will present this clinical practice guideline at international congresses and publish in the Journal of <i>Surgical Endoscopy &amp; Other Interventional Techniques</i>.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Questions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We will conduct a clinical practice guideline to provide evidence-informed treatment recommendations for patients with achalasia. We will examine the following questions:</p>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In patients with type I achalasia, what is the relative impact of Botox injection versus pneumatic dilation versus POEM versus Heller myotomy alone versus Heller myotomy with fundoplication on patient-important outcomes?</p>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In patients with type II achalasia, what is the relative impact of Botox injection versus pneumatic dilation versus POEM versus Heller myotomy alone versus Heller myotomy with fundoplication on patient-important outcomes?</p>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In patients with type III achalasia, what is the relative impact of Botox injection versus pneumatic dilation versus POEM versus Heller myotomy alone versus Heller myotomy with fundoplication on patient-important outcomes?</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"3 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70067","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147567430","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}