Dans Antonio Miguel, Dans Leonila, Oxman Andrew David, Robinson Vivian, Acuin Joselito, Tugwell Peter, Dennis Rodolfo, Kang Deying
Department of Medicine, Philippine General Hospital, Section of Adult Medicine, Taft Avenue, Manila, The Philippines.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Jun;60(6):540-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.10.008. Epub 2007 Jan 18.
Recognition of the need for systematically developed clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) has increased dramatically over the past 20 years. CPGs have focused primarily on the effectiveness of interventions, explicitly or implicitly addressing the following question: Will adherence to a recommendation do more good than harm? At times they have also focused on the cost-effectiveness of interventions: Are the net benefits worth the costs? They rarely have focused on equity: Are the recommendations fair? The Knowledge Plus Project of the International Clinical Epidemiology Network attempts to improve the process of CPG development by formulating strategies to consider not just technical issues (effectiveness, and efficiency) but sociopolitical dimensions as well (equity and local appropriateness). This article discusses a proposed lens for users to evaluate how well CPGs address issues of equity.
在过去20年里,对系统性制定临床实践指南(CPG)必要性的认识大幅提高。CPG主要关注干预措施的有效性,或明或暗地解决以下问题:遵循一项建议带来的益处是否大于危害?有时它们也关注干预措施的成本效益:净收益是否值得成本投入?它们很少关注公平性:这些建议公平吗?国际临床流行病学网络的知识增强项目试图通过制定策略来改进CPG的制定过程,这些策略不仅考虑技术问题(有效性和效率),还考虑社会政治层面(公平性和当地适用性)。本文讨论了一种供用户评估CPG解决公平性问题程度的提议视角。