Suppr超能文献

在全基因组测序时代提高基于证据的推荐的效率和相关性:EGAPP 方法更新。

Improving the efficiency and relevance of evidence-based recommendations in the era of whole-genome sequencing: an EGAPP methods update.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, Institute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.

出版信息

Genet Med. 2013 Jan;15(1):14-24. doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.106. Epub 2012 Sep 6.

Abstract

To provide an update on recent revisions to Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) methods designed to improve efficiency, and an assessment of the implications of whole genome sequencing for evidence-based recommendation development. Improvements to the EGAPP approach include automated searches for horizon scanning, a quantitative ranking process for topic prioritization, and the development of a staged evidence review and evaluation process. The staged process entails (i) triaging tests with minimal evidence of clinical validity, (ii) using and updating existing reviews, (iii) evaluating clinical validity prior to analytic validity or clinical utility, (iv) using decision modeling to assess potential clinical utility when direct evidence is not available. EGAPP experience to date suggests the following approaches will be critical for the development of evidence based recommendations in the whole genome sequencing era: (i) use of triage approaches and frameworks to improve efficiency, (ii) development of evidence thresholds that consider the value of further research, (iii) incorporation of patient preferences, and (iv) engagement of diverse stakeholders. The rapid advances in genomics present a significant challenge to traditional evidence based medicine, but also an opportunity for innovative approaches to recommendation development.

摘要

提供最近修订的实践和预防中的基因组应用评估 (EGAPP) 方法的更新,这些方法旨在提高效率,并评估全基因组测序对循证推荐制定的影响。EGAPP 方法的改进包括自动化 horizon scanning 搜索、主题优先级的定量排名过程,以及分阶段的证据审查和评估过程。分阶段过程包括 (i) 对临床有效性证据最少的测试进行分类,(ii) 使用和更新现有审查,(iii) 在分析有效性或临床实用性之前评估临床有效性,(iv) 在没有直接证据时使用决策建模评估潜在的临床实用性。迄今为止,EGAPP 的经验表明,以下方法对于全基因组测序时代循证推荐的制定将至关重要:(i) 使用分类方法和框架来提高效率,(ii) 制定考虑进一步研究价值的证据阈值,(iii) 纳入患者偏好,以及 (iv) 吸引不同的利益相关者。基因组学的快速发展对传统的循证医学提出了重大挑战,但也为推荐制定提供了创新方法的机会。

相似文献

7
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
10
The EGAPP initiative: lessons learned.
Genet Med. 2014 Mar;16(3):217-24. doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.110. Epub 2013 Aug 8.

引用本文的文献

1
Utilizing Public Health Frameworks and Partnerships to Ensure Equity in DNA-Based Population Screening.
Front Genet. 2022 May 13;13:886755. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.886755. eCollection 2022.
2
A Systematic Review and Recommendations Around Frameworks for Evaluating Scientific Validity in Nutritional Genomics.
Front Nutr. 2021 Dec 14;8:789215. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2021.789215. eCollection 2021.
3
Reimbursement for genetic variant reinterpretation: five questions payers should ask.
Am J Manag Care. 2021 Oct 1;27(10):e336-e338. doi: 10.37765/ajmc.2021.88763.
5
Quality of life drives patients' preferences for secondary findings from genomic sequencing.
Eur J Hum Genet. 2020 Sep;28(9):1178-1186. doi: 10.1038/s41431-020-0640-x. Epub 2020 May 18.
6
Evaluating the Integration of Genomics into Cancer Screening Programmes: Challenges and Opportunities.
Curr Genet Med Rep. 2019;7(2):63-74. doi: 10.1007/s40142-019-00162-x. Epub 2019 May 18.
7
Scanning the horizon: a systematic literature review of methodologies.
BMJ Open. 2019 May 27;9(5):e026764. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026764.
8
How is genetic testing evaluated? A systematic review of the literature.
Eur J Hum Genet. 2018 May;26(5):605-615. doi: 10.1038/s41431-018-0095-5. Epub 2018 Feb 8.
9
Application of the GRADE Approach in the Development of Guidelines and Recommendations in Genomic Medicine.
Genomics Insights. 2018 Jan 30;11:1178631017753360. doi: 10.1177/1178631017753360. eCollection 2018.
10
The Routine Clinical use of Pharmacogenetic Tests: What it Will Require?
Pharm Res. 2017 Aug;34(8):1544-1550. doi: 10.1007/s11095-017-2128-0. Epub 2017 Feb 24.

本文引用的文献

4
Horizon scanning for new genomic tests.
Genet Med. 2011 Feb;13(2):161-5. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3182011661.
6
GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Apr;64(4):383-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026. Epub 2010 Dec 31.
9
The vexing problem of guidelines and conflict of interest: a potential solution.
Ann Intern Med. 2010 Jun 1;152(11):738-41. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-11-201006010-00254. Epub 2010 May 17.
10
Stakeholder perspectives on a risk-benefit framework for genetic testing.
Public Health Genomics. 2011;14(2):59-67. doi: 10.1159/000290452. Epub 2010 Apr 20.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验