Title |
The development of a guideline implementability tool (GUIDE-IT): a qualitative study of family physician perspectives
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Primary Care, January 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1471-2296-15-19 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Monika Kastner, Elizabeth Estey, Leigh Hayden, Ananda Chatterjee, Agnes Grudniewicz, Ian D Graham, Onil Bhattacharyya |
Abstract |
The potential of clinical practice guidelines has not been realized due to inconsistent adoption in clinical practice. Optimising intrinsic characteristics of guidelines (e.g., its wording and format) that are associated with uptake (as perceived by their end users) may have potential. Using findings from a realist review on guideline uptake and consultation with experts in guideline development, we designed a conceptual version of a future tool called Guideline Implementability Tool (GUIDE-IT). The tool will aim to involve family physicians in the guideline development process by providing a process to assess draft guideline recommendations. This feedback will then be given back to developers to consider when finalizing the recommendations. As guideline characteristics are best assessed by end-users, the objectives of the current study were to explore how family physicians perceive guideline implementability, and to determine what components should comprise the final GUIDE-IT prototype. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 1 | 20% |
Spain | 1 | 20% |
United States | 1 | 20% |
Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Peru | 2 | 3% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
Brazil | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 72 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 21% |
Researcher | 9 | 12% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 9% |
Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
Other | 5 | 7% |
Other | 22 | 29% |
Unknown | 11 | 14% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 28% |
Social Sciences | 9 | 12% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 7% |
Psychology | 4 | 5% |
Engineering | 4 | 5% |
Other | 19 | 25% |
Unknown | 14 | 18% |