Editor's Correspondence |

Evaluation of IDSA Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Call to Re-GRADE Underlying Evidence—Reply

Dong Heun Lee, MD; Ole Vielemeyer, MD
Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(15):1401-1404. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.347.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


In reply

We welcome the insightful comments by Drs Deresinski and File and agree that in the era of the evidence-based medicine, guidelines have become a key reference for decision making in clinical medicine and often form the basis on which the delivery of best-possible patient care is defined. Our analysis1 along with that of Dr Khan's group2 found a relative paucity of good quality evidence behind current IDSA guidelines (http://www.idsociety.org). We concur that this reflects a lack of good scientific data in the field, rather than an inherent shortcoming of the development process of the guidelines and that “A marked expansion of the infrastructure for infectious disease clinical research is necessary for the improvement of patient care.” The highly successful AIDS Clinical Trial Group is one example that illustrates how networks and collaborative efforts have produced critically needed and scientifically sound research. Similar endeavors should be encouraged and coordinated for all aspects of infectious diseases research across the globe. We believe that, furthermore, a better understanding of the fundamental processes that govern the complex interplay between host and pathogen in disease is also needed. Continued emphasis must thus be placed also on basic and translational research in the field.

Sign In to Access Full Content

Don't have Access?

Register and get free email Table of Contents alerts, saved searches, PowerPoint downloads, CME quizzes, and more

Subscribe for full-text access to content from 1998 forward and a host of useful features

Activate your current subscription (AMA members and current subscribers)

Purchase Online Access to this article for 24 hours

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





August 8, 2011
Abdur Rahman Khan, MD; Larry M. Baddour, MD; Imad M. Tleyjeh, MD, MSc
Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(15):1401-1404. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.346.
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).
Submit a Comment


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Sign In to Access Full Content

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Topics
PubMed Articles