Current methods for developing practice guidelines include informal consensus development, formal consensus development, evidence-based guideline development, and explicit guideline development. Informal consensus development is the oldest and most common approach, but guidelines produced in this manner are often of poor quality and lack adequate documentation of methods. Formal consensus development uses a systematic approach to assess expert opinion and to reach agreement on recommendations. Evidence-based guideline development links recommendations directly to scientific evidence of effectiveness; rules of evidence are emphasized over expert opinion in making recommendations. Explicit guideline development clarifies the rationale by specifying the potential benefits, harms, and costs of available interventions; estimating the possibility of the outcomes; and comparing the desirability of the outcomes based on patient preferences. Steps in the development of practice guidelines include introductory decisions (selection of topic and panel members, clarification of purpose); assessments of clinical appropriateness (review of scientific evidence and expert opinion); assessment of public policy issues (resource limitations, feasibility issues); and guideline document development and evaluation (drafting of document, peer review, and pretesting).
(Arch Intern Med. 1992;152:946-952)
Thank you for submitting a comment on this article. It will be reviewed by JAMA Internal Medicine editors. You will be notified when your comment has been published. Comments should not exceed 500 words of text and 10 references.
Do not submit personal medical questions or information that could identify a specific patient, questions about a particular case, or general inquiries to an author. Only content that has not been published, posted, or submitted elsewhere should be submitted. By submitting this Comment, you and any coauthors transfer copyright to the journal if your Comment is posted.
* = Required Field
Disclosure of Any Conflicts of Interest*
Indicate all relevant conflicts of interest of each author below, including all relevant financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including, but not limited to, employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speakers’ bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued. If all authors have none, check "No potential conflicts or relevant financial interests" in the box below. Please also indicate any funding received in support of this work. The information will be posted with your response.
Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.
Download citation file:
Web of Science® Times Cited: 298
Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.
More Listings atJAMACareerCenter.com >
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a link to reset your password.
Enter your username and email address. We'll send instructions on how to reset your password to the email address we have on record.
Athens and Shibboleth are access management services that provide single sign-on to protected resources. They replace the multiple user names and passwords necessary to access subscription-based content with a single user name and password that can be entered once per session. It operates independently of a user's location or IP address. If your institution uses Athens or Shibboleth authentication, please contact your site administrator to receive your user name and password.