Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/113895
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWiles, L.en
dc.contributor.authorHibbert, P.en
dc.contributor.authorStephens, J.en
dc.contributor.authorCoiera, E.en
dc.contributor.authorWestbrook, J.en
dc.contributor.authorBraithwaite, J.en
dc.contributor.authorDay, R.en
dc.contributor.authorHillman, K.en
dc.contributor.authorRunciman, W.en
dc.date.issued2017en
dc.identifier.citationBMJ Open, 2017; 7(10)en
dc.identifier.issn2044-6055en
dc.identifier.issn2044-6055en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/113895-
dc.description.abstractIntroduction Despite widespread availability of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), considerable gaps continue between the care that is recommended (‘appropriate care’) and the care provided. Problems with current CPGs are commonly cited as barriers to providing ’appropriate care'. Our study aims to develop and test an alternative method to keep CPGs accessible and up to date. This method aims to mitigate existing problems by using a single process to develop clinical standards (embodied in clinical indicators) collaboratively with researchers, healthcare professionals, patients and consumers. A transparent and inclusive online curated (purpose-designed, custom-built, wiki-type) system will use an ongoing and iterative documentation process to facilitate synthesis of up-to-date information and make available its provenance. All participants are required to declare conflicts of interest. This protocol describes three phases: engagement of relevant stakeholders; design of a process to develop clinical standards (embodied in indicators) for ‘appropriate care’ for common medical conditions; and evaluation of our processes, products and feasibility. Methods and analysis A modified e-Delphi process will be used to gain consensus on ‘appropriate care’ for a range of common medical conditions. Clinical standards and indicators will be developed through searches of national and international guidelines, and formulated with explicit criteria for inclusion, exclusion, time frame and setting. Healthcare professionals and consumers will review the indicators via the wiki-based modified e-Delphi process. Reviewers will declare conflicts of interest which will be recorded and managed according to an established protocol. The provenance of all indicators and suggestions included or excluded will be logged from indicator inception to finalisation. A mixed-methods formative evaluation of our research methodology will be undertaken. Ethics and dissemination Human Research Ethics Committee approval has been received from the University of South Australia. We will submit the results of the study to relevant journals and offer national and international presentations. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/en
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityLouise K Wiles, Peter D Hibbert, Jacqueline H Stephens, Enrico Coiera, Johanna Westbrook, Jeffrey Braithwaite, Ric O Day, Ken M Hillman, William B Runcimanen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Groupen
dc.rights© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http:// creativecommons. org/ licenses/ by- nc/ 4. 0/en
dc.subjectHumans; Program Evaluation; Consensus; Qualitative Research; Research Design; Delphi Technique; Health Personnel; Delivery of Health Care; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Quality Improvementen
dc.titleSTANDING Collaboration: a study protocol for developing clinical standardsen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.identifier.rmid0030094268en
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014048en
dc.relation.granthttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1054146en
dc.identifier.pubid430829-
pubs.library.collectionMedicine publicationsen
pubs.library.teamDS10en
pubs.verification-statusVerifieden
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden
dc.identifier.orcidStephens, J. [0000-0002-7278-1374]en
Appears in Collections:Medicine publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_113895.pdfPublished version549.3 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.