Canadian Thoracic Society: Presenting a new process for clinical practice guideline production

20Citations
Citations of this article
41Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

A key mandate of the Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) is to promote evidence-based respiratory care through clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). To improve the quality and validity of the production, dissemination and implementation of its CPGs, the CTS has revised its guideline process and has created the Canadian Respiratory Guidelines Committee to oversee this process. The present document outlines the basic methodological tools and principles of the new CTS guideline production process. Important features include standard methods for choosing and formulating optimal questions and for finding, appraising, and summarizing the evidence; use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system for rating the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations; use of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation instrument for quality control during and after guideline development and for appraisal of other guidelines; use of the ADAPTE process for adaptation of existing guidelines to the local context; and use of the GuideLine Implementability Appraisal tool to augment implementability of guidelines. The CTS has also committed to develop guidelines in new areas, an annual guideline review cycle, and a new formal process for dissemination and implementation. Ultimately, it is anticipated that these changes will have a significant impact on the quality of care and clinical outcomes of individuals suffering from respiratory diseases across Canada. © 2009 Pulsus Group Inc. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gupta, S., Bhattacharyya, O. K., Brouwers, M. C., Estey, E. A., Harrison, M. B., Hernandez, P., … Boulet, L. P. (2009). Canadian Thoracic Society: Presenting a new process for clinical practice guideline production. Canadian Respiratory Journal, 16(6). https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/397818

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free