MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4245182951 · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-148-7-200804010-00021

Guideline Adaptation: An Appealing Alternative to De Novo Guideline Development

2008· letter· en· W4245182951 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Béatrice Fervers, Magali Remy-Stockinger, Ian D. Graham, Bernard Burnand, Margaret B. Harrison, George P. Browman, Jean Latreille

Notice bibliographique

RevueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2008
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Établissements canadiensCanadian Institutes of Health Research
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineGuidelineIntensive care medicinePathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Letters1 April 2008Guideline Adaptation: An Appealing Alternative to De Novo Guideline DevelopmentBeatrice Fervers, MD, MSc, Magali Remy-Stockinger, Msc, Ian D. Graham, PhD, Bernard Burnand, MD, MPH, Margaret Harrison, RN, PhD, George Browman, MD, MSc, and Jean Latreille, MDMBeatrice Fervers, MD, MScFrom Centre Léon Berard, Lyon F-69373, France; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9, Canada; University of Lausanne, CH-1005 Lausanne, Switzerland; Queen's University, Ottawa, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 2E3, Canada; and Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, Longueuil, Québec J4V 2H1, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Magali Remy-Stockinger, MscFrom Centre Léon Berard, Lyon F-69373, France; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9, Canada; University of Lausanne, CH-1005 Lausanne, Switzerland; Queen's University, Ottawa, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 2E3, Canada; and Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, Longueuil, Québec J4V 2H1, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Ian D. Graham, PhDFrom Centre Léon Berard, Lyon F-69373, France; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9, Canada; University of Lausanne, CH-1005 Lausanne, Switzerland; Queen's University, Ottawa, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 2E3, Canada; and Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, Longueuil, Québec J4V 2H1, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Bernard Burnand, MD, MPHFrom Centre Léon Berard, Lyon F-69373, France; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9, Canada; University of Lausanne, CH-1005 Lausanne, Switzerland; Queen's University, Ottawa, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 2E3, Canada; and Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, Longueuil, Québec J4V 2H1, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Margaret Harrison, RN, PhDFrom Centre Léon Berard, Lyon F-69373, France; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9, Canada; University of Lausanne, CH-1005 Lausanne, Switzerland; Queen's University, Ottawa, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 2E3, Canada; and Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, Longueuil, Québec J4V 2H1, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, George Browman, MD, MScFrom Centre Léon Berard, Lyon F-69373, France; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9, Canada; University of Lausanne, CH-1005 Lausanne, Switzerland; Queen's University, Ottawa, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 2E3, Canada; and Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, Longueuil, Québec J4V 2H1, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, and Jean Latreille, MDMFrom Centre Léon Berard, Lyon F-69373, France; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9, Canada; University of Lausanne, CH-1005 Lausanne, Switzerland; Queen's University, Ottawa, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 2E3, Canada; and Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, Longueuil, Québec J4V 2H1, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-148-7-200804010-00021 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail TO THE EDITOR:The ADAPTE Collaboration (www.adapte.org) is an international group aiming to enhance the use of evidence through more efficient development and implementation of guidelines by guideline adaptation. We read with great interest about the process used by the American College of Physicians (ACP) to develop their statement for glycemic control (1). The development and maintenance of high-quality guidelines require substantial time, expertise, and resources, and the ACP has used an attractive alternative to de novo guideline development. Yet guideline adaptation also presents challenges. Although guideline developers often consider existing guidelines as a source of evidence, few are using ...References1. Qaseem A, Vijan S, Snow V, Cross T, Weiss KB, Owens DK; Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee of the American College of Physicians. Glycemic control and type 2 diabetes mellitus: the optimal hemoglobin A1c targets. A guidance statement from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:417-22. [PMID: 17876024] LinkGoogle Scholar2. Graham ID, Harrison MB, Brouwers M, Davies BL, Dunn S. Facilitating the use of evidence in practice: evaluating and adapting clinical practice guidelines for local use by health care organizations. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2002;31:599-611. [PMID: 12353740] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Fervers B, Burgers JS, Haugh MC, Latreille J, Mlika-Cabanne N, Paquet L, et al. Adaptation of clinical guidelines: literature review and proposition for a framework and procedure. Int J Qual Health Care. 2006;18:167-76. [PMID: 16766601] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Shekelle P, Eccles MP, Grimshaw JM, Woolf SH. When should clinical guidelines be updated? BMJ. 2001;323:155-7. [PMID: 11463690] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Eisinger F, Geller G, Burke W, Holtzman NA. Cultural basis for differences between US and French clinical recommendations for women at increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer. Lancet. 1999;353:919-20. [PMID: 10094000] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From Centre Léon Berard, Lyon F-69373, France; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W9, Canada; University of Lausanne, CH-1005 Lausanne, Switzerland; Queen's University, Ottawa, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada; British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 2E3, Canada; and Hôpital Charles LeMoyne, Longueuil, Québec J4V 2H1, Canada.Disclosures: None disclosed. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoGlycemic Control and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: The Optimal Hemoglobin A1c Targets. A Guidance Statement from the American College of Physicians Amir Qaseem , Sandeep Vijan , Vincenza Snow , J. Thomas Cross , Kevin B. Weiss , Douglas K. Owens , and Guideline Adaptation: An Appealing Alternative to De Novo Guideline Development Valerie A. Palda , Ian D. Graham , Dave Davis , Jako Burgers , Melissa Brouwers , Françoise Cluzeau , and Guideline Adaptation: An Appealing Alternative to De Novo Guideline Development Amir Qaseem , Vincenza Snow , and Douglas Owens Metrics Cited ByGuidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Functional Constipation in Korea, 2015 Revised EditionDiagnosis and Treatment of Helicobacter Pylori Infection: Korean and Overseas GuidelinesHistorical Perspective of Helicobacter pylori Treatment in KoreaGuidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection in Korea, 2013 revised editionGuidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Helicobacter pylori Infection in Korea, 2013 Revised EditionKDOQI US Commentary on the 2009 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment of CKD–Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD)The Systematic Guideline Review: Method, rationale, and test on chronic heart failure 1 April 2008Volume 148, Issue 7Page: 563-564KeywordsConflicts of interestResearch quality assessmentResearch reporting guidelines ePublished: 1 April 2008 Issue Published: 1 April 2008 CopyrightCopyright © 2008 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF DownloadLoading ...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,155
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,356
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,845
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,819

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,1550,356
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0070,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,004
Communication savante0,0100,013
Science ouverte0,0040,010
Intégrité de la recherche0,0130,015
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0200,006

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,147
Tête enseignante GPT0,414
Écart entre enseignants0,267 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
DomaineMéthodes
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations9
Publié2008
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAnnals of Internal MedicineMême sujetColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesTravaux en français237 207