The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

A new method of analysis enabled a better understanding of clinical practice guideline development processes

A new method of analysis enabled a better understanding of clinical practice guideline development processes
A new method of analysis enabled a better understanding of clinical practice guideline development processes
Objective: to describe the process by which various forms of evidence are discussed, valued, and interpreted within the process of developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines and, in so doing, to develop a method for such studies.

Study design and setting: an observational study. Two guideline development groups were observed by a nonparticipant observer. The 21 meetings were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using grounded theory and frame analysis. Qualitative analysis was complemented with descriptive statistics.

Results: the groups organized their discussion around four domains—‘science’, ‘practice’, politics', and ‘process’—and used boundary work to mediate between these domains. Both groups spent most time discussing ‘science’, followed by ‘practice’ or its relation with ‘science’.

Conclusion: our analysis offers an innovative, replicable method of analysis of guideline development that permits the identification of the proportions and interrelations between knowledge domains deployed by guideline groups. This analysis also suggests that the participation hierarchy observed here and by others might be an effect of the imbalanced use of knowledge domains in the construction of clinical guidance. This constitutes an important framework to understand the interplay of participants and knowledge in guideline development
clinical practice guidelines, group process, observational study, guideline development, collective reasoning, knowledge process
0895-4356
1199-1206
Moreira, Tiago
974bd87b-c6fa-42b9-955c-42fab332113d
May, Carl
17697f8d-98f6-40d3-9cc0-022f04009ae4
Mason, James
3e81014f-657b-4fd0-b3d8-8031c40dcc5f
Eccles, Martin
3f686d76-2b03-41af-986a-9191a906b739
Moreira, Tiago
974bd87b-c6fa-42b9-955c-42fab332113d
May, Carl
17697f8d-98f6-40d3-9cc0-022f04009ae4
Mason, James
3e81014f-657b-4fd0-b3d8-8031c40dcc5f
Eccles, Martin
3f686d76-2b03-41af-986a-9191a906b739

Moreira, Tiago, May, Carl, Mason, James and Eccles, Martin (2006) A new method of analysis enabled a better understanding of clinical practice guideline development processes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59 (11), 1199-1206. (doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.08.021).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objective: to describe the process by which various forms of evidence are discussed, valued, and interpreted within the process of developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines and, in so doing, to develop a method for such studies.

Study design and setting: an observational study. Two guideline development groups were observed by a nonparticipant observer. The 21 meetings were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using grounded theory and frame analysis. Qualitative analysis was complemented with descriptive statistics.

Results: the groups organized their discussion around four domains—‘science’, ‘practice’, politics', and ‘process’—and used boundary work to mediate between these domains. Both groups spent most time discussing ‘science’, followed by ‘practice’ or its relation with ‘science’.

Conclusion: our analysis offers an innovative, replicable method of analysis of guideline development that permits the identification of the proportions and interrelations between knowledge domains deployed by guideline groups. This analysis also suggests that the participation hierarchy observed here and by others might be an effect of the imbalanced use of knowledge domains in the construction of clinical guidance. This constitutes an important framework to understand the interplay of participants and knowledge in guideline development

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: November 2006
Keywords: clinical practice guidelines, group process, observational study, guideline development, collective reasoning, knowledge process

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 163553
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/163553
ISSN: 0895-4356
PURE UUID: dbf2a4db-22a8-4203-8b48-19326d58cf0f
ORCID for Carl May: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-0451-2690

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 09 Sep 2010 10:29
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 02:05

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Tiago Moreira
Author: Carl May ORCID iD
Author: James Mason
Author: Martin Eccles

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×