Cargando…

PROTOCOL: Barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: A qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND: 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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9038083/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36911345
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1237
_version_ 1784693854126997504
author 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
author_facet 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
author_sort Magwood, Olivia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: 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. OBJECTIVES: 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? SEARCH METHODS: 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. SELECTION CRITERIA: 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. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: 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. MAIN RESULTS: 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9038083
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90380832023-03-09 PROTOCOL: Barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: A qualitative evidence synthesis 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 Campbell Syst Rev Protocol BACKGROUND: 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. OBJECTIVES: 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? SEARCH METHODS: 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. SELECTION CRITERIA: 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. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: 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. MAIN RESULTS: 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. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9038083/ /pubmed/36911345 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1237 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Campbell Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Protocol
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
PROTOCOL: Barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: A qualitative evidence synthesis
title PROTOCOL: Barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: A qualitative evidence synthesis
title_full PROTOCOL: Barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: A qualitative evidence synthesis
title_fullStr PROTOCOL: Barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: A qualitative evidence synthesis
title_full_unstemmed PROTOCOL: Barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: A qualitative evidence synthesis
title_short PROTOCOL: Barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: A qualitative evidence synthesis
title_sort protocol: barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: a qualitative evidence synthesis
topic Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9038083/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36911345
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1237
work_keys_str_mv AT magwoodolivia protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT riddlealison protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT petkovicjennifer protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT lytvynlyubov protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT khabsajoanne protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT atwerepearl protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT akleliea protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT campbellpauline protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT welchvivian protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT smithmaureen protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT mustafareema protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT limburgheather protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT dansleonilaf protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT skoetznicole protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT grantsean protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT concannontom protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis
AT tugwellpeter protocolbarriersandfacilitatorstostakeholderengagementinhealthguidelinedevelopmentaqualitativeevidencesynthesis