This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (26)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Quality of Care  • Evidence-Based Medicine  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Deborah Cook, MD, MSc; Mita Giacomini, PhD

JAMA. 1999;281:1950-1951.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Reports critiquing the validity of randomized trials,¹ meta-analyses,² diagnostic test studies,³ and economic evaluations⁴ have challenged researchers to improve the conduct of their studies and have encouraged readers to interpret them carefully. The study by Shaneyfelt and colleagues⁵ in this issue of THE JOURNAL tackles the clinical practice guideline industry, asking fundamental questions about how well they measure up to contemporary standards. Most guidelines outlined their rationale, specified the benefits and harms of health practices, and cited their evidentiary sources. However, guidelines much less often described how the evidence was found, how its worth was judged, and how diverse sources of evidence were combined to formulate recommendations.

The metric against which clinicians might judge guidelines is complex and multidimensional. Guideline creators, consumers, and critics will recognize the challenge of developing a credible instrument for this purpose. Shaneyfelt et al have captured key features . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Author Affiliations: Departments of Medicine (Dr Cook) and Clinical Epidemiology (Drs Cook and Giacomini) and the Center for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (Dr Giacomini), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario. Dr Cook is a consulting editor for JAMA.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Are Guidelines Following Guidelines?: The Methodological Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines in the Peer-Reviewed Medical Literature
Terrence M. Shaneyfelt, Michael F. Mayo-Smith, and Johann Rothwangl
JAMA. 1999;281(20):1900-1905.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Family physicians and dementia in Canada: Part 1. Clinical practice guidelines: awareness, attitudes, and opinions
Pimlott et al.
cfp 2009;55:506-507.e5.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Postpublication External Review of the Japanese Guidelines for the Management of Stroke 2004
Shinohara et al.
Stroke 2009;40:1439-1443.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

New grades for recommendations from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care
CMAJ 2003;169:207-208.
FULL TEXT  

Comparing methodological quality and consistency of international guidelines for the management of patients with chronic heart failure
Kulig et al.
Eur J Heart Fail 2003;5:327-335.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Critical Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines Targeting Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Lacasse et al.
Arch Intern Med 2001;161:69-74.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT