Background
Methods
Guideline selection | Extraction of recommendations |
---|---|
Were QIs developed from • one guideline, • more than one guideline, or • guidelines and other sources? | Were • all recommendations or • a selection of recommendations extracted? |
Which criteria for guideline selection were reported? | If not all recommendations were extracted, which criteria were reported for their selection? |
Did the authors report a critical appraisal of selected guidelines? | Who did extraction recommendations? |
Were the selected guidelines listed in the publication? | Which criteria were reported for the selection of persons involved in recommendation extraction? |
Who selected the guidelines? | Were the extracted recommendations reported in the publication or additional files available to the reader? |
Which criteria were reported for the selection of persons involved in guideline selection? | Did the authors report sources/levels of evidence of the extracted recommendations? |
Results
Search findings and literature selection
General characteristics
|
Quality assessment
| |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Reference
|
Institution
|
Topic
|
Setting
|
Study/publication type mentioned
|
Study duration mentioned
|
Funding
|
Method papers
| ||||||
ÄZQ (2009) | ÄZQ (Berlin, DE) | - | - | No | n/a | Unclear |
AHCPR (1995) | AHRQ (Rockville, MD, US) | - | - | No | n/a | Unclear |
AHRQ (1995) | AHRQ (Rockville, MD, US) | - | - | Yes - report | n/a | Combined public/private |
AQUA (2010) | AQUA (Göttingen, DE) | - | - | Yes - method paper | n/a | Unclear |
Baker and Fraser (1995) | Eli Lilly National Clinical Audit Centre (Leicester, UK) | - | - | Yes - review | n/a | Unclear |
Bergman (1999) | Dept. of Pediatrics, Stanford School of Medicine (Palo Alto, CA, US) | - | - | No | n/a | Unclear |
Califf et al. (2002) | DCRI (Durham, NC, US) | - | - | Yes - state-of-the-art paper | n/a | Public |
Campbell et al. (2002) | NPCRDC (Manchester, UK) | - | - | Yes - review | n/a | Unclear |
Graham et al. (2009) | Immpact (Aberdeen, UK) | - | - | Yes - review | n/a | Public |
Spertus et al. (2005) | AHA (Dallas, TX, US) | - | - | No | n/a | Public |
Topic papers
| ||||||
Bonow et al. (2005) | AHA (Dallas, TX, US) | Heart failure | Hospital/outpatient care | Yes - report | No | Public |
Burge et al. (2007) | CCORT (Toronto, CA) | Heart failure | Primary care | No | No | Public |
Campbell et al. (1999) | NPCRDC (Manchester, UK) | CHD, Type 2 Diabetes, Asthma | Primary care | Yes - original article | No | Unclear |
Desch et al. (2008) | RPCI (Buffalo, NY, US) | Breast cancer | Hospital care | Yes - special article | No | Public |
Draskovic et al. (2008) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Dementia | Hospital care | No | No | Public |
Estes et al. (2008) | AHA (Dallas, TX, US) | Atrial fibrillation | Outpatient care | Yes - report | No | Public |
Forbes et al. (1997) | KU School of Nursing (Kansas City, MO, US) | Stroke | Rehabilitation | No | No | Public |
Giesen et al. (2007) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Prescribing and referral | Emergency primary care | No | No | Unclear |
Hadorn et al. (1996) | RAND (Santa Monica, CA, US) | Heart failure | Primary care | Yes - article | No | Combined public/private |
Hardy and Hadley (1995) | CCQE (Washington, DC, US) | Pain | All | No | No | Unclear |
Hermanides et al. (2008) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Urinary tract infection | Hospital care | Yes - major article | No | Unclear |
Hermens et al. (2006) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Lung cancer | Hospital care | Yes - article | No | Public |
James et al. (1997) | Office of Rural Health (Buffalo, NY, US) | Heart failure | Primary care | Yes - paper | No | Public |
Kongnyuy and van den Broek (2008) | LSTM (Liverpool, UK) | Perinatal care | Hospital care | Yes - research article | No | Combined public/private |
Krumholz et al. (2006) | AHA (Dallas, TX, US) | Myocardial infarction | Hospital care | Yes - report | No | Public |
Lee et al. (2003) | CCORT (Toronto, CA) | Heart failure | Hospital/outpatient care | Yes - clinical study | No | Public |
MacLean et al. (2004) | RAND (Santa Monica, CA, US) | Rheumatoid arthritis | All | Yes - original article | No | Unclear |
Martirosyan et al. (2008) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Type 2 Diabetes | Primary care | Yes - original research | No | Public |
Mourad et al. (2007) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Subfertility care | All | No | No | Public |
Nijkrake et al. (2009) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Parkinson's disease | Physiotherapy | No | No | Public |
Ouwens et al. (2007) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Head and neck cancer | Cross-sectoral care | Yes - original article | No | Public |
Ouwens et al. (2010) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Patient-centered care | All | Yes - original article | No | Unclear |
Radtke et al. (2009) | CVderm (Hamburg, DE) | Psoriasis vulgaris | All | Yes - original paper | No | Unclear |
Redberg et al. (2009) | AHA (Dallas, TX, US) | Cardiovascular prevention | All | Yes - report | No | Public |
Schouten et al. (2005) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Pneumonia | Hospital care | yes - major article | No | unclear |
Sugarman et al. (2003) | Qualis Health (Seattle, WA, US) | Dialysis | All | Yes - special article | Yes | Public |
Thomas et al. (2007) | AHA (Dallas, TX, US) | Cardiovascular diseases | Rehabilitation | No | No | Public |
Tu et al. (2008) | CCORT (Toronto, CA) | Myocardial infarction | Hospital care | Yes - review | No | Public |
van den Boogaard et al. (2010) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Miscarriage | All | Yes - article | No | Public |
van Hulst et al. (2009) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Rheumatoid arthritis | All | Yes - extended report | No | Unclear |
Wang et al. (2006) | RAND (Santa Monica, CA, US) | Preterm birth | Outpatient care | Yes - article | No | Public |
Yazdany et al. (2009) | UCSF (San Francisco, CA, US) | Lupus erythematodes | All | Yes - original article | No | Unclear |
Method + topic papers
| ||||||
Advani et al. (2003) | BMIR (Stanford, CA, US) | Hypertension | All | No | No | Public |
Duffy et al. (2005) | APIRE (Arlington, VA, US) | Bipolar disorder | Outpatient care | No | No | Unclear |
Golden et al. (2008) | UAMS (Little Rock, US) | Bipolar disorder | Outpatient care | No | No | Public |
Hutchinson et al. (2003) | ScHARR (Sheffield, UK) | CHD | Primary care | Yes - original paper | Yes | Combined public/private |
LaClair et al. (2001) | VA Medical Center (Kansas City, MO, US) | Stroke | Rehabilitation | No | No | Public |
Wollersheim et al. (2007) | IQ healthcare (Nijmegen, NL) | Oncology, Type 2 Diabetes, pneumonia | All | Yes - review article | No | Unclear |
Topic/guideline selection | Extraction of recommendations | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Reference
|
Criteria for selection of topic
|
Development of QI from...
|
Criteria for selection of participants
|
Criteria for selection of guidelines
|
Participants listed
a
|
Critical appraisal
|
Guidelines listed
a
|
Extraction of all/a selection of recommendations
|
Criteria for recommendation selection
b
|
Potential indicators listed
a
|
Method papers
| ||||||||||
ÄZQ (2009) | No | One guideline | No | No | - | No | - | Unclear | - | - |
AHCPR (1995) | No | One guideline | Yes Profession involved in the selected healthcare process, methodological competence | Yes Methodological quality | - | Yes Not detailed | - | Selection | Yes Impact on patient outcome | - |
AHRQ (1995) | Yes Regulatory requirements, quality gap, guideline adherence unknown | More than one guideline | No | Yes Methodological quality | - | Yes Not detailed | - | Selection | Yes Impact on patient outcome and relevance to obtaining value for money | - |
AQUA (2010) | Yes Public health relevance, sound evidence base, feasibility | Guidelines and other sources | No | Yes Methodological quality | - | Yes AGREE Instrument | - | All | - | - |
Baker and Fraser (1995) | No | Not specified (method paper) | No | No | - | Yes Not detailed | - | Unclear | - | - |
Bergman (1999) | Yes Sound evidence base | Not specified (method paper) | No | No | - | Yes Not detailed | - | Unclear | . | - |
Califf et al. (2002) | No | One guideline | No | No | - | Yes Not detailed | - | Selection | Yes Level of evidence | - |
Campbell et al. (2002) | No | Not specified (method paper) | No | No | - | No | - | Unclear | - | - |
Graham et al. (2009) | Yes Quality gap | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | - | No | - | Unclear | - | - |
Spertus et al. (2005) | No | Not specified (method paper) | No | Yes Strength of evidence, clinical relevance, magnitude of relationship between performance and outcome | - | Yes Not detailed | - | Selection | Yes Level of evidence, impact on patient outcome | - |
Topic papers
| ||||||||||
Bonow et al. (2005) | Yes Public health relevance, quality gap, costs | More than one guideline | No | No | Yes | Yes Not detailed | Yes | Selection | Yes Grade of recommendation, relevance for the topic | No |
Burge et al. (2007) | Yes Public health relevance, quality gap | Unclear | No | No | Yes | No | No | Selection | Yes Potential for improvement, meaningful, valid, reliable, adjustable, feasible | No |
Campbell et al. (1999) | Yes Public health relevance, substantial amount of workload in general practice | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | No | No | Yes | Unclear | - | No |
Desch et al. (2008) | No | Guidelines and other sources | Yes Profession involved in the selected healthcare process | No | Unclear | No | Yes | Selection | Yes Impact on patient outcome, potential for improvement, feasibility of data collection | No |
Draskovic et al. (2008) | Yes Variance in quality of care between providers | One guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | Unclear | - | No |
Estes et al. (2008) | Yes Public health relevance and costs | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | Yes | Yes Not detailed | Yes | Selection | Yes Grade of recommendation, relevance for the topic | No |
Forbes et al. (1997) | Yes Public health relevance, individual impact on quality of life | One guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | All | - | No |
Giesen et al. (2007) | Yes Quality of care unknown | Guidelines and other sources | No | Yes Applicability to the setting, clinical relevance | Yes | Yes AGREE instrument | Yes | Selection | Yes Relevance for the selected topic | No |
Hadorn et al. (1996) | Yes Public health relevance, individual quality-of-life impact, costs | One guideline | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | All | - | Yes |
Hardy and Hadley (1995) | No | One guideline | No | Unclear | No | No | Yes | Unclear | - | No |
Hermanides et al. (2008) | Yes Public health relevance, quality gap | One guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | Selection | No | Yes |
Hermens et al. (2006) | Yes Quality of care unknown, guideline adherence unclear | One guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | All | - | No |
James et al. (1997) | Yes Public health relevance, costs, quality gap | One guideline | No | No | No | Yes Not detailed | Yes | All | - | No |
Kongnyuy and van den Broek (2008) | No | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | No | No | Yes | Unclear | - | No |
Krumholz et al. (2006) | Yes Public health relevance, quality gap | More than one guideline | No | No | Yes | Yes Not detailed | Yes | Selection | Yes Grade of recommendation | No |
Lee et al. (2003) | No | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | No | No | Yes | Unclear | - | No |
Maclean et al. (2004) | Yes Public health relevance | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | No | Unclear | Yes | Selection | Yes Impact on patient outcome, grade of recommendation | No |
Martirosyan et al. (2008) | Yes Public health relevance, quality of care unknown | More than one guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | Selection | Yes Measurability | Yes |
Mourad et al. (2007) | Yes Public health relevance, quality gap | More than one guideline | No | Yes Methodological quality | No | No | Yes | All | - | No |
Nijkrake et al. (2009) | Yes Public health relevance and complexity of the topic | One guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | Selection | Yes Acceptability, measurability | No |
Ouwens et al. (2007) | Yes Complexity of the process of care | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | No | No | Yes | Selection | Yes Impact on patient outcome | No |
Ouwens et al. (2010) | Yes Individual impact on quality of life, quality gap | Guidelines and other sources | No | Yes Applicability to the setting | No | No | Yes | All | - | No |
Radtke et al. (2009) | No | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | No | Yes Not detailed | Yes | Unclear | - | No |
Redberg et al. (2009) | Yes Public health relevance, costs, quality gap | One guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | Selection | Unclear | No |
Schouten et al. (2005) | Yes Quality gap | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | No | No | Yes | Selection | No | Yes |
Sugarman et al. (2003) | Yes Quality of care unknown, regulatory requirements | One guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | Unclear | - | No |
Thomas et al. (2007) | Yes Underutilization, quality of care unknown | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | Yes | Yes Not detailed | Yes | Selection | Yes Grade of recommendation, level of evidence | No |
Tu et al. (2008) | Yes Quality gap | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | Selection | Yes Meaningful, valid and reliable, feasible, accountable for patient variability, potential for improvement, | No |
van den Boogaard et al. (2010) | Yes Quality gap | One guideline | No | Yes Most recently revised guideline available | No | No | Yes | All | - | No |
van Hulst et al. (2009) | No | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | No | No | Yes | Selection | Yes Grade of recommendations | No |
Wang et al. (2006) | Yes Public health relevance, complex process of care, quality gap | Guidelines and other sources | No | No | Yes | No | No | Selection | Yes Impact on patient outcome, level of evidence, potential for improvement, feasibility of data collection | No |
Yazdany et al. (2009) | Yes Quality of care unknown | Guidelines and other sources | No | Yes Methodological quality | Yes | Unclear | No | Selection | Yes Eligible population, process of care performed by healthcare providers, impact on patient outcome | No |
Method + topic papers
| ||||||||||
Advani et al. (2003) | No | One guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | Unclear | - | No |
Duffy et al. (2005) | Yes Individual impact on quality of life, quality gap | More than one guideline | No | No | No | No | Yes | Selection | Yes Level of evidence, impact on patient outcome, breadth of available treatment recommendations, clinical utility and appropriateness, proportion of patients for whom the recommendation is likely to be relevant | No |
Golden et al. (2008) | Yes Public health relevance, costs, quality gap | Guidelines and other sources | Yes Profession involved in the selected health care process | No | No | No | No | Selection | Yes Level of evidence | No |
Hutchinson et al. (2003) | No | More than one guideline | No | Yes Evidence based | No | Yes Suitable for primary care, agency responsible for development clearly identifiable, objectives clearly defined, independent review prior to publication, information regarding evidence adequate and explicit, link between major recommendations and underlying evidence | Yes | Selection | Unclear | No |
Laclair et al. (2001) | No | One guideline | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | All | - | No |
Wollersheim et al. (2007) | Yes Quality gap, public health relevance, sound evidence base | Guidelines and other sources | Yes Membership in a guideline-development committee, methodological competence, profession involved in the selected healthcare process | No | No | No | Yes | Unclear | - | No |
QI selection | Additional QI development elements | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Reference
|
Panel method
|
Criteria for panel members
|
Panel members listed
a
|
Selected indicators listed
a
|
Sources transparent
1
|
LoE
b
|
Rating criteria
|
Practice test
|
Implementation strategy
|
Patient participation
|
Method papers
| ||||||||||
ÄZQ (2009) | Unclear | Unclear | - | - | - | Yes | Yes Importance for the healthcare system, clarity, improvability, risk for adverse effect, evidence base, grade of recommendation | Proposed | No | No |
AHCPR (1995) | No | No panel method | - | - | - | No | Unclear | Not mentioned | No | No |
AHRQ (1995) | No | No panel method | - | - | - | No | No | Included | Yes Development of data collection software, audit and feedback | No |
AQUA (2010) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise | - | - | - | Yes | Yes Relevance, clarity, feasibility | Included | Yes Development/upgrading of data collection software | QI selection |
Baker and Fraser (1995) | No | No panel method | - | - | - | No | Unclear | Not mentioned | Yes Local development, ownership | No |
Bergman (1999) | No | No panel method | - | - | - | Yes | Unclear | Proposed | Yes Involving key stakeholders | No |
Califf et al. (2002) | No | No panel method | - | - | - | Yes | Unclear | Not mentioned | Yes Education and feedback | No |
Campbell et al. (2002) | Other | Unclear | - | - | - | No | Unclear | Not mentioned | No | No |
Graham et al. (2009) | Other | No | - | - | - | No | Yes Grade of recommendation, level of evidence, measurability, improvability | Included | Yes Audit and feedback | No |
Spertus et al. (2005) | No | No panel method | - | - | - | No | Yes Useful in improving patient outcomes, measure design, measure implementation, overall assessment | Not mentioned | No | No |
Topic papers
| ||||||||||
Bonow et al. (2005) | Other | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Useful in improving patient outcomes, measure design, measure implementation, overall assessment | Not mentioned | Yes Defining challenges to implementation for each QI | No |
Burge et al. (2007) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Members of specialist societies | Yes | Yes | In part | No | No | Proposed | No | No |
Campbell et al. (1999) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise, members of specialist societies | No | Yes | In part | Yes | No | Not mentioned | Yes | No |
Desch et al. (2008) | Other | Yes Members of specialist societies, methodological expertise | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Not mentioned | Yes Integration in nationwide quality-improvement programs | No |
Draskovic et al. (2008) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes Face validity | Included | Yes Including the informal caregivers' perspective | No |
Estes et al. (2008) | Other | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Useful to improve patient outcomes, measure design, measure implementation, overall assessment | Not mentioned | Yes Defining challenges to implementation for each QI | No |
Forbes et al. (1997) | No | No panel method | No panel method | Yes | Yes | No | No | Included | Yes Pilot testing | No |
Giesen et al. (2007) | Other | Unclear | No | Yes | In part | No | Yes Relevance, utility for evaluation of care | Included | No | No |
Hadorn et al. (1996) | Unclear | No | No | Yes | In part | No | Unclear | Not mentioned | No | No |
Hardy and Hadley (1995) | Unclear | Unclear | No | No | Yes | No | No | Not mentioned | No | No |
Hermanides et al. (2008) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Appropriateness | Included | No | No |
Hermens et al. (2006) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes Professional quality, organisational quality, patient-oriented quality | Included | Yes Practice test | QI selection |
James et al. (1997) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Educational appropriateness, clinical importance, measurement feasibility | Not mentioned | No | No |
Kongnyuy and van den Broek (2008) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise, laypersons | No | Yes | In part | No | No | Planned | Yes Involving all grades of health professionals during the whole development process | QI selection |
Krumholz et al. (2006) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise members of specialist societies | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Useful in improving patient outcomes, measure design, measure implementation, overall assessment | Not mentioned | Yes Defining challenges to implementation for each QI | No |
Lee et al. (2003) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise | Yes | Yes | In part | No | Yes Meaningfulness, usefulness, potential for improvement, impact on patient outcomes, feasibility of data collection | Not mentioned | No | No |
Maclean et al. (2004) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes linical expertise, methodological expertise members of specialist societies | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Unclear | Not mentioned | No | No |
Martirosyan et al. (2008) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise members of specialist societies | No | Yes | In part | No | Unclear | Included | No | No |
Mourad et al. (2007) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Unclear | Proposed | Yes Practice test | No |
Nijkrake et al. (2009) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes Relevance (effectiveness, efficiency, acceptability, measurability) | Included | Yes Training in the correct use of the respective guideline | No |
Ouwens et al. (2007) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise | No | Yes | In part | No | Yes Clinically relevant to patients' health benefits and/or to the continuity and coordination of care | Included | Yes Practice test | QI selection |
Ouwens et al. (2010) | Other | Yes Patient representatives | No | Yes | In part | No | Unclear | Included | Yes Patient participation | QI selection |
Radtke et al. (2009) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise, patients | No | Yes | In part | No | Yes Inclusion in the research literature, measurable under routine conditions, inclusion in a certain high-quality guideline, reproducibility, validity, clinical relevance, sensitivity to change | Included | No | No |
Redberg et al. (2009) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise membership in specialist societies | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Useful in improving patient outcomes, measure design, measure implementation, overall assessment | Not mentioned | No | No |
Schouten et al. (2005) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Clinical relevance to the patient's health benefit, relevance to reducing antimicrobial resistance, relevance to cost effectiveness | Included | No | No |
Sugarman et al. (2003) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise, membership in specialist societies | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes Clinical importance, feasibility of measurement, level of evidence | Included | No | No |
Thomas et al. (2007) | Unclear | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise, membership in specialist societies | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Evidence based, interpretable, actionable, clinically meaningful, valid, reliable, feasible | Not mentioned | Yes Defining challenges to implementation for each QI | No |
Tu et al. (2008) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise, membership in specialist societies | Yes | Yes | In part | No | Yes Usefulness in improving patient outcomes, feasibility of data collection, reliability, validity | Not mentioned | Yes Pay for performance, collaboration with national and local initiatives, use of standard tools, presentation at scientific meetings, availability online | No |
van den Boogaard et al. (2010) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes Health gain, overall efficacy | Proposed | No | No |
van Hulst et al. (2009) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise | No | Yes | In part | Yes | No | Not mentioned | Yes Using understandable and measurable QIs | No |
Wang et al. (2006) | Other | Yes Membership in specialist societies | No | Yes | In part | Yes | Yes Validity, feasibility | Not mentioned | No | No |
Yazdany et al. (2009) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes Evidence base, validity, feasibility | Proposed | Yes Assess the technical characteristics of developed QIs | No |
Method + topic papers
| ||||||||||
Advani et al. (2003) | No | No panel method | No panel method | No | Yes | No | No | Included | No | No |
Duffy et al. (2005) | Unclear | Unclear | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Unclear | Planned | Yes Integration in health plan performance measurement, quality monitoring and accreditation programs, integration of needed data elements in medical information systems | No |
Golden et al. (2008) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise, laypersons | No | No | In part | No | Yes Meaningfulness, quality gap, improvability, feasibility of data collection | Included | Yes Transparency during the development process, providing the data collection tool, submission to a national performance measurement program | QI selection |
Hutchinson et al. (2003) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise | No | Yes | In part | Yes | No | Not mentioned | No | No |
Laclair et al. (2001) | Other | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | Included | No | No |
Wollersheim et al. (2007) | Modified RAND/UCLA | Yes Clinical expertise, methodological expertise | No | Yes | In part | Unclear | No | Included | Yes Periodic audits | No |
Topic selection
-
the public health relevance of a topic (mentioned in 18 publications),
-
the existence of a gap between potential and actually achieved quality of healthcare (mentioned in 16 publications).
Guideline selection
-
the methodological quality,
-
the up-to-dateness,
-
the eligibility of a guideline for the selected topic (e.g., with regard to the specific setting).
-
member of a guideline development committee,
-
having methodological competence,
-
belonging to a profession involved in the selected healthcare process.
Extraction of recommendations
-
the size of the impact on patient health (the AHRQ considers the impact great when an issue affects a few patients severely or affects many patients),
-
the relevance to obtaining value for money.
-
the importance to quality of healthcare provided,
-
the feasibility of monitoring.
-
clinician and nonclinician management skills,
-
clinical expertise,
-
technical expertise in performance measurement,
-
healthcare information management expertise.