TY - JOUR
T1 - Methods for living guidelines: early guidance based on practical experience
T2 - Paper 4: Search methods and approaches for living guidelines
AU - McDonald, Steve
AU - Sharp, Steve
AU - Morgan, Rebecca L.
AU - Murad, M. Hassan
AU - Fraile Navarro, David
AU - on behalf of the Australian Living Evidence Consortium Methods and Processes Working Group and Collaborators
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Declaration of competing interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2023/3
Y1 - 2023/3
N2 - Objectives: To describe the key features of a continual evidence surveillance process that can be implemented for living guidelines and to outline the considerations and trade-offs in adopting different approaches. Study Design and Setting: Members of the Australian Living Evidence Consortium (ALEC), National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and the US GRADE Network (USGN) shared their practical experiences of and approaches to establishing surveillance systems for living guidelines. We identified several common components of evidence surveillance and listed the key features and considerations for each component drawn from case studies, highlighting differences with standard guidelines. Results: We developed guidance that covers the initial information needed to support decisions around suitability for living mode and the practical considerations in setting up continual search surveillance systems (search frequency, sources to search, use of automation, reporting the search, ongoing resources, and evaluation). The case studies draw on our experiences with developing guidelines for COVID-19, as well as for other conditions such as stroke and diabetes, and cover a range of practical approaches, including the use of automation. Conclusion: This paper highlights different approaches to continual evidence surveillance that can be implemented in living guidelines.
AB - Objectives: To describe the key features of a continual evidence surveillance process that can be implemented for living guidelines and to outline the considerations and trade-offs in adopting different approaches. Study Design and Setting: Members of the Australian Living Evidence Consortium (ALEC), National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and the US GRADE Network (USGN) shared their practical experiences of and approaches to establishing surveillance systems for living guidelines. We identified several common components of evidence surveillance and listed the key features and considerations for each component drawn from case studies, highlighting differences with standard guidelines. Results: We developed guidance that covers the initial information needed to support decisions around suitability for living mode and the practical considerations in setting up continual search surveillance systems (search frequency, sources to search, use of automation, reporting the search, ongoing resources, and evaluation). The case studies draw on our experiences with developing guidelines for COVID-19, as well as for other conditions such as stroke and diabetes, and cover a range of practical approaches, including the use of automation. Conclusion: This paper highlights different approaches to continual evidence surveillance that can be implemented in living guidelines.
KW - COVID-19
KW - Evidence surveillance
KW - Guideline development
KW - Living evidence
KW - Living guidelines
KW - Search methods
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85149671779
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.12.023
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.12.023
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85149671779
SN - 0895-4356
VL - 115
SP - 108
EP - 117
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
ER -