Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
|Title:||Living systematic reviews: 4. Living guideline recommendations|
|Citation:||Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2017; 91:47-53|
|Elie A. Akl, Joerg J. Meerpohl, Julian Elliott, Lara A. Kahale, Holger J. Schünemann … Zachary Munn … [et al.] On behalf of the Living Systematic Review Network|
|Abstract:||While it is important for the evidence supporting practice guidelines to be current, that is often not the case. The advent of living systematic reviews has made the concept of "living guidelines" realistic, with the promise to provide timely, up-to-date and high-quality guidance to target users. We define living guidelines as an optimization of the guideline development process to allow updating individual recommendations as soon as new relevant evidence becomes available. A major implication of that definition is that the unit of update is the individual recommendation and not the whole guideline. We then discuss when living guidelines are appropriate, the workflows required to support them, the collaboration between living systematic reviews and living guideline teams, the thresholds for changing recommendations, and potential approaches to publication and dissemination. The success and sustainability of the concept of living guideline will depend on those of its major pillar, the living systematic review. We conclude that guideline developers should both experiment with and research the process of living guidelines.|
|Keywords:||Living systematic review; living guidelines; updating systematic reviews; updating guidelines; prioritizing recommendations|
|Rights:||© 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.|
|Appears in Collections:||Aurora harvest 8|
Public Health publications
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.