The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development

Abstract Background Skin rash remains one of the most prevalent and troublesome clinical problems experienced by patients on chemotherapy and targeted therapy. To ensure high-quality care, guidelines are seen as the best guidance. Considering the quality of guidelines varies greatly, a systematical appraisal of the methodological quality of guidelines for the management of skin rash in patients on chemotherapeutic drugs and targeted anticancer therapies was undertaken, in order to identify appropriate ones for healthcare professionals. Methods A systematic search of databases and Internet was conducted to obtain pertinent guidelines. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of guidelines according to the inclusion criteria. Then the guidelines included were appraised by three researchers with the methodological quality of eligible guideline using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREEII). Results Totally nineteen guidelines met the inclusion criteria. The quality ranged from good to acceptable in scope and purpose (mean: 78.80%, range: 66.67–94.44%) and clarity of presentation domains (mean: 85.38%, 75.00–91.67%), but not in stakeholder involvement (mean: 50.15%, range: 36.11–75.00%), rigor of development (mean: 23.65%, range: 6.25–70.83%), applicability (mean: 23.96%, range: 4.17–52.08%), and editorial independence domains (mean: 45.18%, range: 0.00–87.50%). Overall, two guidelines were classified as “recommended”. Conclusions Only two guidelines were recommended to manage skin rash in patients on chemotherapy and targeted therapies, most guidelines issued were of low to moderate quality. Thus, more attention should be paid to the methodological quality of guideline development in this field.

Download Full-text

Improving outcome reporting in clinical trial reports and protocols: study protocol for the Instrument for reporting Planned Endpoints in Clinical Trials (InsPECT)

10.31219/osf.io/w6kaz ◽

2018 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Nancy J. Butcher ◽

Andrea Monsour

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Delphi Study ◽

Guideline Development ◽

Poor Quality ◽

Consensus Meeting ◽

Reporting Guideline ◽

Research Quality ◽

Outcome Reporting ◽

Trial Protocols ◽

Implementation And Dissemination

Background: Inadequate and poor quality outcome reporting in clinical trials is a well-documented problem that impedes the ability of researchers to evaluate, replicate, synthesize and build upon study findings and impacts evidence-based decision making by patients, clinicians, and policy makers. To facilitate harmonized and transparent reporting of outcomes in trial protocols and published reports, the Instrument for reporting Planned Endpoints in Clinical Trials (InsPECT), is being developed. The final product will provide unique InsPECT Extensions to the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) and CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) reporting guidelines.Methods: The InsPECT CONSORT and SPIRIT Extensions will be developed in accordance with the methodological framework created by the EQUATOR (Enhancing Quality and Transparency of Health Research Quality) Network for reporting guideline development. Development will consist of: (1) the creation of an initial list of candidate outcome reporting items synthesized from expert consultations and a scoping review of existing guidance for reporting outcomes in trial protocols and reports; (2) a three-round international Delphi study to identify additional candidate items and assess candidate item importance on a nine-point Likert scale, completed by trial report and protocol authors, systematic review authors, biostatisticians and epidemiologists, reporting guideline developers, clinicians, journal editors, and research ethics board representatives; and (3) an in-person expert consensus meeting to finalize the set of essential outcome reporting items for trial protocols and reports, respectively. The consensus meeting discussions will be independently facilitated and informed by the empirical evidence identified in the primary literature and through the opinions (aggregate rankings and comments) collected via the Delphi study. An integrated knowledge translation approach will be used throughout InsPECT development to facilitate implementation and dissemination, in addition to standard post-development activities. Discussion: InsPECT will provide evidence-informed and consensus-based standards focused on outcome reporting in clinical trials that can be applied across diverse disease areas, study populations, and outcomes. InsPECT will support the standardization of trial outcome reporting, which will maximize trial usability, reduce bias, foster trial replication, improve trial design and execution, and ultimately reduce research waste and help improve patient outcomes.

Download Full-text

Patient-Clinician Communication: American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2017.75.2311 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 35 (31) ◽

pp. 3618-3632 ◽

Cited By ~ 145

Author(s):

Timothy Gilligan ◽

Nessa Coyle ◽

Richard M. Frankel ◽

Donna L. Berry ◽

Kari Bohlke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Communication Skills ◽

Family Involvement ◽

Guideline Development ◽

Well Being ◽

Clinician Training ◽

Additional Information ◽

Care Guidelines ◽

American Society ◽

Meta Analyses

Purpose To provide guidance to oncology clinicians on how to use effective communication to optimize the patient-clinician relationship, patient and clinician well-being, and family well-being. Methods ASCO convened a multidisciplinary panel of medical oncology, psychiatry, nursing, hospice and palliative medicine, communication skills, health disparities, and advocacy experts to produce recommendations. Guideline development involved a systematic review of the literature and a formal consensus process. The systematic review focused on guidelines, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 2006 through October 1, 2016. Results The systematic review included 47 publications. With the exception of clinician training in communication skills, evidence for many of the clinical questions was limited. Draft recommendations underwent two rounds of consensus voting before being finalized. Recommendations In addition to providing guidance regarding core communication skills and tasks that apply across the continuum of cancer care, recommendations address specific topics, such as discussion of goals of care and prognosis, treatment selection, end-of-life care, facilitating family involvement in care, and clinician training in communication skills. Recommendations are accompanied by suggested strategies for implementation. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Download Full-text