A Reporting Tool for Adapted Guidelines in Health Care: The RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist.

Autor:	Song Y; Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre (CCIb)-Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), and PhD Programme in Methodology of Biomedical Research and Public Health, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain (Y.S.)., Alonso-Coello P; Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre (CCIb)-Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain (P.A., L.M.G.)., Ballesteros M; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain (M.B.)., Cluzeau F; London, United Kingdom (F.C.)., Vernooij RWM; Department of Nephrology and Hypertension and Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands (R.W.V.)., Arayssi T; Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Doha, Qatar (T.A.)., Bhaumik S; Meta-research & Evidence Synthesis Unit, The George Institute for Global Health, New Delhi, India (S.B.)., Chen Y; Research Unit of Evidence-Based Evaluation and Guidelines, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (2021RU017), School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, and WHO Collaborating Centre for Guideline Implementation and Knowledge Translation, Lanzhou, China (Y.C.)., Ghersi D; National Health and Medical Research Council, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia (D.G.)., Langlois EV; Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health (PMNCH), World Health Organization, Geneve, Switzerland (E.V.L.)., Fuentes Padilla P; Facultad de Medicina y Odontología, Universidad de Antofagasta, Antofagasta, Chile (P.F.P.)., Schünemann HJ; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada and McGRADE Centres, and Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada, and Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy (H.J.S.)., Akl EA; Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon, and Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada (E.A.A.)., Martínez García L; Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre (CCIb)-Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain (P.A., L.M.G.)., Amer Y, Arevalo-Rodriguez I, Barnes S, Barreto J, Collis D, Dyer S, Fahim C, Florez I, Gallegos-Rivero V, Klugar M, Kuijpers T, Mathew JL, Munn Z, Norris S, Patiño-Lugo DF, Pramesh CS, Rodriguez J, Roy S, Shin ES, Sosa O, Vandvik PO, Velez M, Woodcraft R
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Annals of internal medicine [Ann Intern Med] 2022 May; Vol. 175 (5), pp. 710-719. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Mar 15.
DOI:	10.7326/M21-4352
Abstrakt:	Background: Adaptation of existing guidelines can be an efficient way to develop contextualized recommendations. Transparent reporting of the adaptation approach can support the transparency and usability of the adapted guidelines. Objective: To develop an extension of the RIGHT (Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare) statement for the reporting of adapted guidelines (including recommendations that have been adopted, adapted, or developed de novo), the RIGHT-Ad@pt checklist. Design: A multistep process was followed to develop the checklist: establishing a working group, generating an initial checklist, optimizing the checklist (through an initial assessment of adapted guidelines, semistructured interviews, a Delphi consensus survey, an external review, and a final assessment of adapted guidelines), and approval of the final checklist by the working group. Setting: International collaboration. Participants: A total of 119 professionals participated in the development process. Measurements: Participants' consensus on items in the checklist. Results: The RIGHT-Ad@pt checklist contains 34 items grouped in 7 sections: basic information (7 items); scope (6 items); rigor of development (10 items); recommendations (4 items); external review and quality assurance (2 items); funding, declaration, and management of interest (2 items); and other information (3 items). A user guide with explanations and real-world examples for each item was developed to provide a better user experience. Limitation: The RIGHT-Ad@pt checklist requires further validation in real-life use. Conclusion: The RIGHT-Ad@pt checklist has been developed to improve the reporting of adapted guidelines, focusing on the standardization, rigor, and transparency of the process and the clarity and explicitness of adapted recommendations. Primary Funding Source: None.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu