Premium
Comparison of the guideline development processes used for type 2 diabetes dietetic practice guidelines
Author(s) -
KNIGHTS Sallyanne,
TAPSELL Linda
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
nutrition and dietetics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.479
H-Index - 31
eISSN - 1747-0080
pISSN - 1446-6368
DOI - 10.1111/j.1747-0080.2007.00078.x
Subject(s) - guideline , checklist , medicine , audit , clinical practice , best practice , family medicine , nursing , medical education , psychology , management , pathology , economics , cognitive psychology
Objective: To compare procedures used for the development of three sets of dietetic practice guidelines for type 2 diabetes: the Queensland Best Practice Guidelines (Queensland Guidelines), New Zealand Standards of Care (New Zealand Guidelines) (unpublished, 2003) and American Nutrition Practice Guidelines (American Guidelines) against National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) standards for development of clinical practice guidelines. Design: The Queensland, New Zealand and American guidelines were audited against a checklist based on the NHMRC clinical practice guideline development standards, accounting for the recommended tasks and the order in which they should be completed. Additional information regarding the development processes was obtained from development coordinators of the existing dietetic practice guidelines for type 2 diabetes. Results: The American guidelines addressed more of the components of development recommended by the NHMRC than the Queensland and New Zealand guidelines. Most importantly the American guidelines were tested for clinical and cost effectiveness. Conclusion or application: The data presented show that the American Guidelines came closest to meeting the NHMRC criteria. These results suggest that the American Guidelines may best suit Australian requirements.