Magwood Olivia, Riddle Alison, Petkovic Jennifer, Lytvyn Lyubov, Khabsa Joanne, Atwere Pearl, Akl Elie A, Campbell Pauline, Welch Vivian, Smith Maureen, Mustafa Reem A, Limburg Heather, Dans Leonila F, Skoetz Nicole, Grant Sean, Concannon Tom, Tugwell Peter
C.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre Bruyere Research Institute Ottawa Canada.
School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine University of Ottawa Ottawa Canada.
Campbell Syst Rev. 2022 Apr 25;18(2):e1237. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1237. eCollection 2022 Jun.
There is a need for the development of comprehensive, global, evidence-based guidance for stakeholder engagement in guideline development. Stakeholders are any individual or group who is responsible for or affected by health- and healthcare-related decisions. This includes patients, the public, providers of health care and policymakers for example. As part of the guidance development process, Multi-Stakeholder Engagement (MuSE) Consortium set out to conduct four concurrent systematic reviews to summarise the evidence on: (1) existing guidance for stakeholder engagement in guideline development, (2) barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in guideline development, (3) managing conflicts of interest in stakeholder engagement in guideline development and (4) measuring the impact of stakeholder engagement in guideline development. This protocol addresses the second systematic review in the series.
The objective of this review is to identify and synthesise the existing evidence on barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development. We will address this objective through two research questions: (1) What are the barriers to multi-stakeholder engagement in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist? (2) What are the facilitators to multi-stakeholder engagement in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist?
A comprehensive search strategy will be developed and peer-reviewed in consultation with a medical librarian. We will search the following databases: MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, PsycInfo, Scopus, and Sociological Abstracts. To identify grey literature, we will search the websites of agencies who actively engage stakeholder groups such as the AHRQ, Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR), INVOLVE, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the PCORI. We will also search the websites of guideline-producing agencies, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, Australia's National Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and the WHO. We will invite members of the team to suggest grey literature sources and we plan to broaden the search by soliciting suggestions via social media, such as Twitter.
We will include empirical qualitative and mixed-method primary research studies which qualitatively report on the barriers or facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development. The population of interest is stakeholders in health guideline development. Building on previous work, we have identified 13 types of stakeholders whose input can enhance the relevance and uptake of guidelines: Patients, caregivers and patient advocates; Public; Providers of health care; Payers of health services; Payers of research; Policy makers; Program managers; Product makers; Purchasers; Principal investigators and their research teams; and Peer-review editors/publishers. Eligible studies must describe stakeholder engagement at any of the following steps of the GIN-McMaster Checklist for Guideline Development.
All identified citations from electronic databases will be imported into Covidence software for screening and selection. Documents identified through our grey literature search will be managed and screened using an Excel spreadsheet. A two-part study selection process will be used for all identified citations: (1) a title and abstract review and (2) full-text review. At each stage, teams of two review authors will independently assess all potential studies in duplicate using a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data will be extracted by two review authors independently and in duplicate according to a standardised data extraction form.
The results of this review will be used to inform the development of guidance for multi-stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation. This guidance will be official GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Working Group guidance. The GRADE system is internationally recognised as a standard for guideline development. The findings of this review will assist organisations who develop healthcare, public health and health policy guidelines, such as the World Health Organization, to involve multiple stakeholders in the guideline development process to ensure the development of relevant, high quality and transparent guidelines.
需要制定全面、全球、基于证据的指南,以指导利益相关者参与指南制定。利益相关者是指任何对健康和医疗相关决策负有责任或受其影响的个人或群体。这包括患者、公众、医疗保健提供者和政策制定者等。作为指南制定过程的一部分,多利益相关者参与(MuSE)联盟着手进行四项并行的系统评价,以总结以下方面的证据:(1)利益相关者参与指南制定的现有指南;(2)利益相关者参与指南制定的障碍和促进因素;(3)在利益相关者参与指南制定过程中管理利益冲突;(4)衡量利益相关者参与指南制定的影响。本方案涉及该系列中的第二项系统评价。
本评价的目的是识别和综合关于利益相关者参与健康指南制定的障碍和促进因素的现有证据。我们将通过两个研究问题来实现这一目标:(1)在GIN-麦克马斯特清单的18个步骤中的任何一步,多利益相关者参与健康指南制定的障碍是什么?(2)在GIN-麦克马斯特清单的18个步骤中的任何一步,多利益相关者参与健康指南制定的促进因素是什么?
将制定全面的检索策略,并与医学图书馆员协商进行同行评审。我们将检索以下数据库:医学索引数据库(MEDLINE)、护理学与健康相关文献累积索引(CINAHL)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(EMBASE)、心理学文摘数据库(PsycInfo)、Scopus数据库和社会学文摘数据库。为了识别灰色文献,我们将检索积极让利益相关者群体参与的机构网站,如美国医疗保健研究与质量局(AHRQ)、加拿大卫生研究院(CIHR)以患者为导向的研究战略(SPOR)、参与组织(INVOLVE)、国家卫生与保健优化研究所(NICE)和患者为中心的结果研究所(PCORI)。我们还将检索指南制定机构的网站,如美国儿科学会、澳大利亚国家卫生与医学研究委员会(NHMRC)和世界卫生组织(WHO)。我们将邀请团队成员推荐灰色文献来源,并计划通过社交媒体(如Twitter)征求建议来扩大检索范围。
我们将纳入实证性定性和混合方法的原发性研究,这些研究定性报告利益相关者参与健康指南制定的障碍或促进因素。感兴趣的人群是健康指南制定中的利益相关者。基于先前的工作,我们确定了13种利益相关者,他们的投入可以提高指南的相关性和采用率:患者、护理人员和患者倡导者;公众;医疗保健提供者;卫生服务支付者;研究资助者;政策制定者;项目经理;产品制造商;购买者;主要研究者及其研究团队;以及同行评审编辑/出版商。符合条件的研究必须描述在GIN-麦克马斯特指南制定清单的以下任何步骤中的利益相关者参与情况。
从电子数据库中识别出的所有文献将导入Covidence软件进行筛选和选择。通过灰色文献检索识别出的文献将使用Excel电子表格进行管理和筛选。将对所有识别出的文献采用两部分的研究选择过程:(1)标题和摘要评审;(2)全文评审。在每个阶段,由两名评审作者组成的团队将使用预先设定的纳入和排除标准独立地对所有潜在研究进行重复评估。数据将由两名评审作者根据标准化的数据提取表独立地重复提取。
本评价的结果将用于为多利益相关者参与指南制定和实施的指南制定提供信息。该指南将是正式的GRADE(推荐分级评估、制定和评价)工作组指南。GRADE系统在国际上被公认为指南制定的标准。本评价的结果将有助于世界卫生组织等制定医疗保健、公共卫生和卫生政策指南的组织,让多个利益相关者参与指南制定过程,以确保制定出相关、高质量和透明的指南。