Clinical and Public Health Guidelines最新文献

{"title":"Lifestyle Recommendations in the Dutch Clinical Practice Guidelines","authors":"Florien Ham,&nbsp;Anh N. Nguyen,&nbsp;Elizabeth F. C. van Rossum,&nbsp;Mariëtte R. Boon,&nbsp;Janke F. de Groot","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70037","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Medical specialists play an essential role in guiding lifestyle changes in chronically ill patients, contributing to health-related prevention. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are an important tool to support medical specialists to implement health-related prevention in daily practice. However, it remains unclear how recommendations on lifestyle interventions are part of CPGs. Therefore, the objective of this study was to analyse existing lifestyle recommendations in Dutch CPGs for medical specialists.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Using a mixed-methods approach, the study examined 130 CPGs to assess the prevalence, type of lifestyle factors being addressed, level of evidence according to GRADE, knowledge gaps and wording of lifestyle recommendations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Results indicated that 65% of the examined CPGs included lifestyle recommendations, with increasing physical activity and improving nutrition being the most addressed factors. Despite only 11% of the recommendations being supported by moderate to high certainty of evidence, 62% were strongly formulated. At the same time, the analysis also revealed unclarity in the wording of recommendations regarding who, what and when to act. Finally, this study shows notable knowledge gaps regarding the effectiveness and feasibility of lifestyle interventions in daily practice.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Despite robust evidence, lifestyle recommendations do have a prominent position in CPGs for chronic diseases in specialist' care. Further research is needed to answer to the knowledge gaps and to what is needed for lifestyle recommendations to be implemented in daily practice.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70037","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144934868","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":"European Association of Endoscopic Surgery Clinical Practice Guideline Protocol: Evidence-Informed Recommendations on the Management of Cholecystitis With ESAIC and ESR Participation","authors":"Bright Huo,&nbsp;Salvador Morales Conde,&nbsp;Carolina Soledad,&nbsp;Alexander A. Tzanis,&nbsp;Alexandros-Georgios Asimakopoulos,&nbsp;Dimitris Mavridis,&nbsp;Gordon Guyatt,&nbsp;Stavros A. Antoniou","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70043","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Several options exist for the management of acute cholecystitis. However, practice patterns vary widely, and there is a need for high-quality guidance in areas of controversy.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>We will develop a clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with Tokyo Grades I–III acute cholecystitis. The guideline will answer the following key questions:\u0000\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li><span>1. </span>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Should adult patients with Grades I or II acute cholecystitis receive conservative management or emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy?</p>\u0000 </li>\u0000 \u0000 <li><span>2. </span>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Should adult patients with Grades II or III acute cholecystitis receive percutaneous drainage or emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy?</p>\u0000 </li>\u0000 \u0000 <li><span>3. </span>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Should adult patients with Grades II or III acute cholecystitis receive conservative management or emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy &gt; 72 h from symptom onset?</p>\u0000 </li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our systematic review group will undertake multiple systematic reviews to identify articles addressing each key question. Next, we will appraise the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. An international, expert multidisciplinary panel will then meet to review the evidence and develop recommendations using GRADE's evidence-to-decision framework. This panel will consist of four general surgeons, an interventional radiologist, an intensive care specialist, an anaesthetist, and two patient representatives. Panel members will finalize our recommendations by consensus at an in-person meeting. This guideline will adhere to methodological standards according to GIN, GRADE and AGREE-S.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Ethics and Dissemination</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>All participating members will declare their conflicts of interest, which will be addressed prior to guideline development. This clinical practice guideline will be presented at international scientific meetings, online presentations and social media, and published in full in the journal of <i>Surgical Endoscopy &amp; Other Interventional Techniques</i>.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70043","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144923648","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 Panel Subgroup (PSG) Method: A Valuable Method for Effectively Engaging Panels in the Development of Practice Guidelines","authors":"Nofisat Ismaila,&nbsp;Brittany E. Harvey,&nbsp;Kaitlin Einhaus,&nbsp;Lawrence Mbuagbaw,&nbsp;Jinhui Ma,&nbsp;Lehana Thabane","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70042","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Clinical practice guidelines rely on expert panels to review evidence and develop recommendations. The traditional approach of engaging experts often relies on periodic full panel meetings which can lead to slow progress and variability in panel engagement. To address these issues, the ASCO introduced the Panel Subgroup (PSG) method, dividing panels into smaller working groups to enhance engagement, distribute workload, and accelerate guideline development.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To evaluate the PSG method on guideline development timelines, its uptake, perceived benefits, challenges, and lessons learned from the perspective of ASCO guideline methodologists.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study had two phases. Phase 1 was a retrospective review of ASCO guideline administrative data (2017–2024) comparing guidelines developed using the traditional or PSG method. Guidelines were included if they were de novo, had over 50 included studies, and complete administrative records. Data extracted included number of panelists, research questions, studies reviewed, subgroups (for PSG), and development time. Phase 2 involved qualitative interviews with methodologists who used the PSG method to explore experiences, benefits, and challenges.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Sixteen guidelines met the inclusion criteria: seven used the traditional method and nine used the PSG method. The average development time was 13 months (SD, 2.41) for the PSG method compared to traditional (23 months; SD, 6.30). PSG uptake among methodologists was 75% (6/8). Reported benefits included improved expert engagement, deeper evidence analysis, better collaboration, and shared authorship. Challenges included greater time demands, increased coordination, writing inconsistencies, and the need for full panel buy-in.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The PSG method offers a promising structure to improve engagement and streamline productivity. While not without challenges, it may be particularly useful for large panels and complex guidelines when applied thoughtfully.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70042","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144923647","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":"Facilitators and Barriers to Successful Collaboration in Guideline Development: Experiential Insights of Collaborative Guideline Developers","authors":"Chatura Prematunge,&nbsp;Amanda Graham,&nbsp;Christina Ventura,&nbsp;Robyn Temple-Smolkin,&nbsp;Emma McFarlane,&nbsp;Aggie Bak,&nbsp;Pamela Ginex,&nbsp;Yasser Sami Amer,&nbsp;Michael Yi,&nbsp;Umer Nadir,&nbsp;Emily Senerth,&nbsp;Priya Jakhmola,&nbsp;Heba Hussein,&nbsp;Bright Huo,&nbsp;Rachel Christensen,&nbsp;Holger Schunemann,&nbsp;Murad Alam,&nbsp;Rebecca L. Morgan,&nbsp;Toju Ogunremi,&nbsp;on behalf of the Guidelines International Network Guidelines Collaboration Working Group","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70036","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70036","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The current study aimed to elucidate themes that contributed to successful and unsuccessful collaborative guideline development between organisations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Study Design and Setting</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The reporting of qualitative methods was checked against the Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist. A purposive sampling approach was used to recruit participants with experience or affiliations in collaborative guideline development. Participants completed a pre-interview questionnaire and took part in semi-structured interviews. Interview transcripts were coded using inductive thematic analysis methodology.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The thematic analysis of guideline developer interviews (<i>n</i> = 14) identified three interconnected theme sets and secondary sub-themes. Misalignment of collaboration purpose and scope, misalignment of guideline development methodologies, and perception that such collaborations require more time and effort were identified as barriers. Technologies and templates that support collaborative work, initial scoping and planning among collaborators, organisational guideline topic prioritisation work, culture of collaboration, and recognising collaboration benefits were identified as facilitators. Cross-cutting themes, which appeared to either enhance or hinder collaboration based on interviewee context, included past collaborative experiences, publication of completed work, and levels of knowledge and training among collaborators.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This analysis demonstrated facilitators and barriers to collaborative guideline development are interconnected. Future research into collaborative guideline development should look towards validating these findings in a more geographically diverse sample and investigate the mechanisms through which barrier, facilitator and cross-cutting themes contribute to guideline collaboration between organisations. Further understanding of factors that can impede or expedite successful collaboration provide opportunities to identify effective strategies for overcoming perceived barriers to collaboration. Findings from this study can be used to bolster collaborative efforts by encouraging alignment in processes, methodology, and expectations, as well as promoting collective knowledge and resource sharing between collaborators within different guideline development organisations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70036","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144897645","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 Protocol","authors":"Timothy Hugh Barker,&nbsp;Grace Holland,&nbsp;Camille Schubert,&nbsp;Danielle Pollock,&nbsp;Cindy Stern,&nbsp;Nipun Shrestha,&nbsp;Wojtek Wiercioch,&nbsp;Samer Karam,&nbsp;Steve Vucic,&nbsp;Jay Beasley-Hall,&nbsp;Lynne Giles,&nbsp;Tracy Merlin,&nbsp;Zachary Munn","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70039","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To systematically review the values and preferences of people with lived experience of motor neurone disease (MND), including those living with MND, caregivers and genetic carriers, regarding their health-related outcomes.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>MND is a devastating neurodegenerative disease that significantly impacts those living with the disease, their caregivers, and their families. Understanding the values and preferences of those affected by MND is crucial for providing patient-centred care and developing trustworthy guidelines.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Eligibility Criteria</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Studies will be included if they report on the values and preferences of adults living with MND; caregivers and families of those diagnosed with MND; clinicians as a proxy for adults living with MND; or asymptomatic genetic carriers of MND. Peer-reviewed studies utilising either quantitative or qualitative methodologies (or both) will be eligible for inclusion in this review.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods and Analysis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A comprehensive search of electronic databases will be conducted to identify relevant studies. Data extraction, risk of bias assessment (of quantitative studies), and assessment of methodological limitations (of qualitative studies) will be performed independently by two reviewers. Quantitative data will be pooled using meta-analysis where appropriate, and qualitative data will be synthesised following a modified meta-aggregative approach. The relevant GRADE approach will be used to assess the certainty of evidence.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Systematic Review Registration Number</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>CRD420250653287.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70039","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144897426","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":"Opportunities and Challenges in Using Artificial Intelligence in Guideline Development and Implementation","authors":"Chirine Chehab,&nbsp;Xiaomei Yao,&nbsp;Jonathan L. Heald,&nbsp;Stacy Lathrop,&nbsp;Heba Hussein,&nbsp;Maria Michaels","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70029","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Artificial intelligence (AI) within clinical care is a burgeoning area of interest. AI is rapidly transforming the landscape of clinical care, revolutionising how healthcare is delivered, managed and optimised [&lt;span&gt;1&lt;/span&gt;]. With its ability to analyse vast amounts of data, identify patterns and make real-time predictions, AI holds immense promise in improving patient outcomes, enhancing efficiency and reducing healthcare costs when the technology is used responsibly and its potential risks are mitigated. AI tools are currently being explored for training clinicians, enhancing the rigour, breadth and precision of environmental and biomedical health data, and reporting, evaluating and synthesising data in biomedical research and clinical practice [&lt;span&gt;2, 3&lt;/span&gt;]. In response, biomedical research and public health agencies are developing frameworks and guidelines for the use of AI in clinical research and direct patient care [&lt;span&gt;1, 4, 5&lt;/span&gt;]. Similarly, funding agencies, scholarly editors and shared oversight bodies are releasing advisories and guidelines for investigators and authors engaged in peer review and writing [&lt;span&gt;6, 7&lt;/span&gt;].&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) are cornerstones of evidence-based medicine, providing standardised recommendations for patient care [&lt;span&gt;8&lt;/span&gt;]. As part of ‘Bringing Guidelines to the Digital Age’, an effort by the Guidelines International Network North America (GIN-NA) regional community that applied human-centred design (HCD) to solve pain points in guideline development and implementation, a multidisciplinary team of systematic reviewers, guideline developers, informaticists, and others worked collaboratively to gain insights, conduct research, and identify possible solutions for three pain points in guideline development and implementation [&lt;span&gt;9, 10&lt;/span&gt;]. The pain points included (1) insufficient informatics resources and expertise to translate ambiguous or complex language in written guidelines into computable formats, (2) incomplete information in existing guidelines that necessitates adapting guidelines to cater for the needs of diverse patient populations, and (3) unclear language, which creates barriers for patients and clinicians to understand and use guidelines [&lt;span&gt;9&lt;/span&gt;].&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Given the widespread availability of AI tools, the team emphasised the need to help guideline developers understand how approaches that include AI tools could address these challenges and facilitate guideline development and implementation. These pain points serve as a framework for exploring potential AI applications within each stage of guideline development. Through weekly meetings, the team looked at potential areas for automation with AI tools in the life cycle of guideline development, adapted from the GIN-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist and the 2011 Institute of Medicine Report, Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust [&lt;span&gt;8, 10&lt;/span&gt;]. These automation approaches","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70029","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144894406","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":"Protocol for the Creation of the Guidelines International Network–McMaster Guideline Development Checklist Extension for Integrating Artificial Intelligence in the Guideline Enterprise (Guidelines-Artificial Intelligence Extension)","authors":"Manuel Marques-Cruz,&nbsp;Bernardo Sousa-Pinto,&nbsp;Wojtek Wiercioch,&nbsp;Marge Reinap,&nbsp;Ignacio Neumann,&nbsp;Yuan Chi,&nbsp;Artur Nowak,&nbsp;Mariette Awad,&nbsp;Monika Nothacker,&nbsp;Jan Brozek,&nbsp;Pablo Alonso-Coello,&nbsp;Amir Qaseem,&nbsp;Elie A. Akl,&nbsp;Holger J. Schünemann","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70038","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to support processes of the guideline enterprise. To support the adequate preplanning and the transparent reporting of the use of AI in the guideline enterprise, the Guidelines International Network (GIN) proposed the development of an extension of the GIN–McMaster Guideline Development Checklist (GDC) for the use of AI in guidelines. Here we describe the protocol for the development of this extension.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We will follow a multiphase approach to generate an extension of the GIN–McMaster GDC. We will start by prompting a large language model to suggest relevant items for the extension. We will subsequently revise the obtained outputs in an iterative process involving the different elements of the working group. This iterative process will be informed by a scoping review. We will then reach different stakeholders to test the proposed checklist extension on their easiness of use, implementation, feasibility and reasonability.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Questions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This protocol lays the ground for the development of an extension to the GIN–McMaster GDC for the use of AI in guidelines. This extension will support the adequate use of AI in the guideline enterprise.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70038","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144891644","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":"Sports Pre-Participation Evaluation in Healthy Adults—A Survey-Based Assessment of Guideline Acceptability and Feasibility Among Sports Physicians and Participants","authors":"Käthe Goossen,&nbsp;Alina Weise,&nbsp;Anja Hirschmüller,&nbsp;Christine Joisten,&nbsp;Sandra Jaax,&nbsp;Charlotte Kreutz,&nbsp;Nadja Koensgen,&nbsp;Jessica Breuing","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70032","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Sports pre-participation evaluations (PPEs) aim to identify people at increased risk of acute adverse events during physical activity. Little is known about their acceptability and feasibility among physicians and participants (‘interest holders’). During the development of a consensus-based PPE guideline in Germany targeted at healthy adults who plan to take up or resume intense physical activity, we used surveys to assess interest holder perceptions of the acceptability and feasibility of the PPE, and to obtain their feedback on draft guideline recommendations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Cross-sectional online surveys were conducted separately in two interest holder groups. Acceptability was evaluated among adults (≥ 18 years) in Germany (‘consumers’), the target population of the PPE guideline. Feasibility was investigated among potential guideline users, which included sports medicine specialists and general practitioners practising in Germany (‘sports physicians’). Agreement with nine acceptability and feasibility statements was analysed descriptively. Comments on draft recommendations were collected and grouped thematically.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A total of 144 consumers and 204 physicians (186 with certification in sports medicine) completed the survey. Among the consumers, 82% would consider making use of a PPE, 8% were neutral, and 10% would not. Only 1% had ‘concerns or reservations’. The main barrier was a potential non-reimbursement of the PPE by their health insurance (61%). Of the 186 certified sports physicians, 83% would offer or already offer a PPE, 12% were neutral, and 5% would not offer a PPE. Potential barriers were non-reimbursement by health insurers (20%), the required time and effort (13%), and qualification issues (14%). About half of the draft recommendations (11/23, 48%) were modified based on interest holder feedback.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Conducting consumer and end-user surveys as part of the guideline development process increased awareness of the main acceptability and feasibility issues, provided relevant suggestions to the draft recommendations, and identified considerations for guideline implementation.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70032","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144881425","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":"A Physical Activity Clinical Practice Guideline for People With Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury","authors":"Leanne Hassett,&nbsp;Liam Johnson,&nbsp;Gavin Williams,&nbsp;Rhys Ashpole,&nbsp;Adrian Bauman,&nbsp;Catherine Carty,&nbsp;Sakina Chagpar,&nbsp;Kelly Clanchy,&nbsp;Abby Haynes,&nbsp;Kate Heine,&nbsp;Zachary Munn,&nbsp;Anthony Okely,&nbsp;Nick Rushworth,&nbsp;Adam Scheinberg,&nbsp;Catherine Sherrington,&nbsp;Grahame Simpson,&nbsp;Anne Tiedemann,&nbsp;Sean Tweedy,&nbsp;Gabrielle Vassallo,&nbsp;Belinda Wang,&nbsp;Kerry West,&nbsp;Luke Wolfenden,&nbsp;the BRIDGES Guideline Development Group members","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70035","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) released the first international public health guideline on physical activity for people with disability. However, the evidence informing the guideline was not specific to people with traumatic brain injury (TBI), nor did it provide guidance for health professionals to promote and deliver physical activity in rehabilitation. We aimed to develop an Australian Physical Activity Clinical Practice Guideline for people with moderate to severe TBI (msTBI).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Questions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This guideline sought to answer the following question: ‘<i>Should <b>[physical activity intervention]</b> compared to control be used for <b>[people with]</b> msTBI?’</i> The question was adapted to five physical activity interventions (structured aerobic exercise, muscle strengthening, gait/balance/functional exercise, sport and physical recreation, and promotion of physical activity) and two populations (children and adolescents; adults and older adults).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) ADOLOPMENT approach to determine whether to ‘adapt’ or ‘adopt’ the WHO guideline or develop <i>de novo</i> recommendations. We established guideline steering, leadership and development groups, conducted a rapid review to identify direct evidence in msTBI, and reviewed guidelines in other relevant health conditions (i.e., stroke, cerebral palsy) to identify indirect evidence. To address evidence gaps and inform implementation considerations, we conducted an audit of brain injury services in Australia and qualitative consultations with key interest-holders, including people with msTBI.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Recommendations</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The guideline incorporates 10 <i>de novo</i> recommendations for people with msTBI for the delivery and promotion of physical activity across the rehabilitation continuum of care. The guideline includes good practice and precautionary points, and subgroup considerations to guide usability and implementation. Data from the clinical audit and interest-holder focus groups indicated feasibility and acceptability of physical activity interventions. The guideline seeks to support health professionals' clinical decision-making and increase uptake of physical activity by people with msTBI.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70035","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144833124","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":"Consolidation, Systematic Appraisal and Comparison of Guideline Recommendations Regarding Management of Chronic Pain: Protocol for a Digital Chronic Pain Recommendation Map","authors":"Andrea J. Darzi,&nbsp;Kian Torabiardakani,&nbsp;Gonzalo Bravo-Soto,&nbsp;Daniela Montalva-Romero,&nbsp;Rachel J. Couban,&nbsp;Lynn Cooper,&nbsp;Stacey Ritz,&nbsp;Jaris Swidrovich,&nbsp;Ivan D. Florez,&nbsp;Vivian Welch,&nbsp;Gordon H. Guyatt,&nbsp;Holger J. Schünemann,&nbsp;Jason W. Busse,&nbsp;on behalf of the Chronic Pain RecMap Collaborative","doi":"10.1002/gin2.70033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/gin2.70033","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Introduction</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Chronic pain affects 1 in 5 adults and children globally; however, management remains highly variable and low value care is common. Inconsistent recommendations among clinical practice guidelines for management of chronic pain contribute to suboptimal patient management. We will develop and disseminate a living digital chronic pain recommendation map (e-Chronic Pain RecMap) to identify trustworthy recommendations in three high priority areas, (1) opioids, (2) cannabis for medical purposes, and (3) spine-related interventional procedures for chronic pain.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The project comprises three phases. A planning phase to engage a diverse group of interest holders to co-design a team structure with our knowledge users to ensure an efficient and effective workflow. Through a search of electronic databases and a manual search of international websites, a development phase to systematically identify relevant guidelines published in any language since 2019. In this development phase, we will update our searches every 6 months. Also, we will appraise the reporting quality of eligible guidelines using the AGREE-II instrument, followed by appraisal of recommendation-level quality using AGREE-REX for guidelines meeting a defined threshold. In a next step, we will extract data from guidelines including relevant equity information using infrastructure in GRADEPro, and explore divergence and compare recommendations answering the same guideline question. Lastly, we will develop plain language summaries of trustworthy recommendations and decision aids to support patient-physician decision making, and translate the platform to French, Spanish, and Mandarin. Finally, a mobilization phase in which, with our interest holders, we will co-create strategies to disseminate the RecMap to relevant target users.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The Chronic Pain RecMap will enhance use of trustworthy guideline recommendations by people living with chronic pain, clinicians, and decision makers. Successful uptake will optimize evidence-based pain management.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":100266,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Public Health Guidelines","volume":"2 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/gin2.70033","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144811330","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}