Qualitative study of guideline panelists: innovative surveys provided valuable insights regarding patient values and preferences

To explore guideline panelists' understanding of panel surveys for eliciting panels’ inferences regarding patient values and preferences, and the influence of the surveys on making recommendations. We performed sampling and data collection from all four guideline panels that had conducted the s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical epidemiology Vol. 161; pp. 173 - 180
Main Authors: Zeng, Linan, Li, Shelly-Anne, Yang, Mengting, Yan, Lijiao, Helsingen, Lise M., Bretthauer, Michael, Agoritsas, Thomas, Vandvik, Per O., Mustafa, Reem A., Busse, Jason, Siemieniuk, Reed A.C., Lytvyn, Lyubov, Zhang, Lingli, Brignardello-Petersen, Romina, Guyatt, Gordon H.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.09.2023
Elsevier Limited
Subjects:
Data analysis
Data collection
Epidemiology
Evidence-Based Medicine
Guideline
Humans
Internal Medicine
Interpretive description
Meetings
Panels
Patient Preference
Patient preferences
Polls & surveys
Qualitative Research
Qualitative study
Recommendation
Reflexivity
Survey
Surveys
Surveys and Questionnaires
Uncertainty
Patient preferences
Guideline
Survey
Qualitative study
Recommendation
Interpretive description
ISSN:0895-4356, 1878-5921, 1878-5921
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To explore guideline panelists' understanding of panel surveys for eliciting panels’ inferences regarding patient values and preferences, and the influence of the surveys on making recommendations. We performed sampling and data collection from all four guideline panels that had conducted the surveys through October 2020. We collected the records of all panel meetings and interviewed some panelists in different roles. We applied inductive thematic analysis for analyzing and interpreting data. We enrolled four guideline panels with 99 panelists in total and interviewed 25 of them. Most panelists found the survey was easy to follow and facilitated the incorporation of patient values and preferences in the tradeoffs between benefits and harms or burdens. The variation of patient preferences and uncertainty regarding patient values and preferences reflected in the surveys helped the panels ponder the strength of recommendations. In doing so, the survey results enhanced a rationale for panels’ decision on the recommendations. The panel surveys have proved to help guideline panels explicitly consider and incorporate patient values and preferences in making recommendations. Guideline panels would benefit from widespread use of the panel surveys, particularly when primary evidence regarding patient values and preferences is scarce.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0895-4356
1878-5921
1878-5921
DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.07.014