Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 219.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 219.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 219.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 219.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\28870182
.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117 BMC+Med+Inform+Decis+Mak
2017 ; 17
(1
): 132
Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
Reviewing clinical guideline development tools: features and characteristics
#MMPMID28870182
Khodambashi S
; Nytrø Ø
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
2017[Sep]; 17
(1
): 132
PMID28870182
show ga
BACKGROUND: To improve consistency and streamline development and publication of
clinical guidelines (GL), there is a need for appropriate software support. We
have found few specific tools for the actual authoring and maintaining of GLs,
and correspondingly few analyses or reviews of GL development tool functionality.
In order to assist GL developers in selecting and evaluating tools, this study
tries to address the perceived gap by pursuing four goals: 1) identifying
available tools, 2) reviewing a representative group of tools and their supported
functionalities, 3) uncovering themes of features that the studied tools support,
and 4) compare the selected tools with respect to the themes. METHODS: We
conducted a literature search using PubMed and Google Scholar in order to find GL
development tools (GDT). We also explored tools and Content Management Systems
(CMS) used in representative organisations and international communities that
develop and maintain GLs. By reading a selected representative group of five GL
tool manuals, exploring tools hands-on, we uncovered 8 themes of features. All
found tools were compared according to these themes in order to identify the
level of functionality they offer to support the GL development and publishing
process. In order to limit the scope, tools for designing
computer-interpretable/executable GL are excluded. RESULTS: After finding 1552
published papers, contacting 7 organizations and international communities, we
identified a total of 19 unique tools, of which 5 tools were selected as
representative in this paper. We uncovered a total of 8 themes of features
according to the identified functionalities that each tool provides. Four
features were common among tools: Collaborative authoring process support, user
access control, GL repository management, electronic publishing. We found that
the GRADE methodology was supported by three of the reviewed tools, while only
two tools support annotating GL with MeSH terms. We also identified that
monitoring progress, reference management, Managing versions (version control),
and Change control (tracking) were often the missing features. CONCLUSION: The
results can promote sector discussion and eventual agreement on important tool
functionality. It may aid tool and GL developers towards more efficient, and
effective, GL authoring.