scholarly journals Sex and gender considerations in Canadian clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review

CMAJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. E66-E73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cara Tannenbaum ◽  
Barbara Clow ◽  
Margaret Haworth-Brockman ◽  
Patrice Voss
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Sex And Gender ◽  
And Gender

scholarly journals Sex and gender considerations in low back pain clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000972
Author(s):  
Tori Rathbone ◽  
Catherine Truong ◽  
Haley Haldenby ◽  
Sara Riazi ◽  
Mara Kendall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Sex And Gender ◽  
And Gender

ObjectiveThe purpose of this scoping review is to determine if and how sex and gender have been incorporated into low back pain (LBP) clinical practice guidelines (CPG), and if sex and gender terms have been used properly.MethodsCPGs were searched on MEDLINE, Embase, NICE, TRIP and PEDro from 2010 to 2020. The inclusion criteria were English language, CGPs within physiotherapy scope of practice and for adult population with LBP of any type or duration. Three pairs of independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Guidelines were searched for sex/gender-related terms and recommendations were extracted. The AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) was used to evaluate the quality of the CPGs.ResultsThirty-six CPGs were included, of which 15 were test-positive for sex or gender terms. Only 33% (n=5) of CPGs incorporated sex or gender into diagnostic or management recommendations. Sixty percent of guidelines (n=9) only referenced sex or gender in relation to epidemiology, risk factors or prognostic data, and made no specific recommendations. Overall, there was no observable relationship between guideline quality and likeliness of integrating sex or gender terms. The majority of guidelines used sex and gender terms interchangeably, and no guidelines defined sex or gender.ConclusionCPGs did not consistently consider sex and gender differences in assessment, diagnosis or treatment of LBP. When it was considered, sex and gender terms were used interchangeably, and considerations were primarily regarding pregnancy. Researchers should consider the importance of including sex-based and/or gender-based recommendations into future LBP CPGs.

scholarly journals Electronic intrapartum fetal monitoring. A systematic review of international clinical practice guidelines.

2021 ◽  
pp. 100008
Author(s):  
Manoj Mohan ◽  
Joohi Ramawat ◽  
Gene La Monica ◽  
Pradeep Jayaram ◽  
Sherif Abdel Fattah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Fetal Monitoring ◽  
Intrapartum Fetal Monitoring

scholarly journals Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for adults with fractures: identification of best evidence for rehabilitation to develop the WHO’s Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Gimigliano ◽  
◽  
Sara Liguori ◽  
Antimo Moretti ◽  
Giuseppe Toro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Distal Radius ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
World Health ◽  
The World

Abstract Background The identification of existing rehabilitation interventions and related evidence represents a crucial step along the development of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation (PIR). The methods for such identification have been developed by the WHO Rehabilitation Programme and Cochrane Rehabilitation under the guidance of the WHO’s Guideline Review Committee secretariat. The aim of this paper is to report on the results of the systematic search for clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) relevant to the rehabilitation of adults with fractures and to present the current state of evidence available from the identified CPGs. Methods This paper is part of the Best Evidence for Rehabilitation (be4rehab) series, developed according to the methodology presented in the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation (PIR) introductory paper. It is a systematic review of existing CPGs on fractures in adult population published from 2009 to 2019. Results We identified 23 relevant CPGs after title and abstract screening. According to inclusion/exclusion criteria, we selected 13 CPGs. After checking for quality, publication time, multiprofessionality, and comprehensiveness, we finally included five CPGs dealing with rehabilitative management of fractures in adult population, two CPGs addressing treatment of distal radius fracture and three the treatment of femoral/hip fracture. Conclusion The selected CPGs on management of distal radius and femoral/hip fracture include few recommendations regarding rehabilitation, with overall low to very low quality of evidence and weak/conditional strength of recommendation. Moreover, several gaps in specific rehabilitative topics occur. Further high-quality trials are required to upgrade the quality of the available evidence. Level of evidence Level 1.

scholarly journals Appraising the quality standard underpinning international clinical practice guidelines for the selection and care of vascular access devices: a systematic review of reviews

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e021040 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Blanco-Mavillard ◽  
Miguel Angel Rodríguez-Calero ◽  
Enrique Castro-Sánchez ◽  
Miquel Bennasar-Veny ◽  
Joan De Pedro-Gómez
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Quality Standard ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Vascular Access Devices

ObjectiveCatheter-related bloodstream infections are one of the most important adverse events for patients. Evidence-based practice embraces interventions to prevent and reduce catheter-related bloodstream infections in patients. At present, a growing number of guidelines exist worldwide. The purpose of the study was to assess clinical practice guidelines for peripheral and central venous access device care and prevention of related complications.DesignSystematic review of clinical practice guidelines: We conducted a search of the literature published from 2005 to 2018 using Medline/PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Ovid, ScienceDirect, Scopus and Web of Science. We also evaluated grey literature sources and websites of organisations that compiled or produced guidelines. Guideline quality was assessed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, Second Edition tool by three independent reviewers. Cohen’s kappa coefficient was used to evaluate the concordance between reviewers.ResultsWe included seven guidelines in the evaluation. The concordance between observers was substantial, K=0.6364 (95% CI 0.0247 to 1.2259). We identified seven international guidelines, which scored poorly on crucial domains such as applicability (medium 39%), stakeholder involvement (medium 65%) and methodological rigour (medium 67%). Guidelines by Spanish Health Ministry and UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence presented the highest quality.ConclusionsIt is crucial to critically evaluate the validity and reliability of clinical practice guidelines so the best, most context-specific document is selected. Such choice is a necessary prior step to encourage and support health organisations to transfer research results to clinical practice. The gaps identified in our study may explain the suboptimal clinical impact of guidelines. Such low adoption may be mitigated with the use of implementation guides accompanying clinical documents.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document