IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v36y2016i6p692-702.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines

Author

Listed:
  • Nancy Santesso
  • Gian Paolo Morgano
  • Susan M. Jack
  • R. Brian Haynes
  • Sophie Hill
  • Shaun Treweek
  • Holger J. Schünemann

Abstract

Background . Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are typically written for health care professionals but are meant to assist patients with health care decisions. A number of guideline producers have started to develop patient versions of CPGs to reach this audience. Objective . To describe the content and purpose of patient versions of CPGs and compare with patient and public views of CPGs. Design . A descriptive qualitative study with a directed content analysis of a sample of patient versions of CPGs published and freely available in English from 2012 to 2014. Results . We included 34 patient versions of CPGs from 17 guideline producers. Over half of the patient versions were in dedicated patient sections of national/professional agency websites. There was essentially no information about how to manage care in the health care system. The most common purpose was to equip people with information about disease, tests or treatments, and recommendations, but few provided quantitative data about benefits and harms of treatments. Information about beliefs, values and preferences, accessibility, costs, or feasibility of the interventions was rarely addressed. Few provided personal stories or scenarios to personalize the information. Three versions described the strength of the recommendation or the level of evidence. Limitations . Our search for key institutions that produce patient versions of guidelines was comprehensive, but we only included English and freely available versions. Future work will include other languages. Conclusions . This review describes the current landscape of patient versions of CPGs and suggests that these versions may not address the needs of their targeted audience. Research is needed about how to personalize information, provide information about factors contributing to the recommendations, and provide access.

Suggested Citation

  • Nancy Santesso & Gian Paolo Morgano & Susan M. Jack & R. Brian Haynes & Sophie Hill & Shaun Treweek & Holger J. Schünemann, 2016. "Dissemination of Clinical Practice Guidelines," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(6), pages 692-702, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:36:y:2016:i:6:p:692-702
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X16644427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X16644427
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X16644427?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dixon-Woods, Mary, 2001. "Writing wrongs? An analysis of published discourses about the use of patient information leaflets," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 52(9), pages 1417-1432, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hicks, Alison, 2022. "The missing link: Towards an integrated health and information literacy research agenda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    2. Dixon-Woods, Mary & Ashcroft, Richard E. & Jackson, Clare J. & Tobin, Martin D. & Kivits, Joelle & Burton, Paul R. & Samani, Nilesh J., 2007. "Beyond "misunderstanding": Written information and decisions about taking part in a genetic epidemiology study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(11), pages 2212-2222, December.
    3. Lemire, Marc & Sicotte, Claude & Paré, Guy, 2008. "Internet use and the logics of personal empowerment in health," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 130-140, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:36:y:2016:i:6:p:692-702. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.