Your English writing platform
Free sign upSuggestions(2)
Exact(1)
It builds on other existing guideline methodologies such as those developed by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) groups.
Similar(59)
It is recognised that a limitation of this study is the paucity of responses to the section of the survey dealing with guideline methodology.
Responses to survey questions concerning Guideline methodology may not be fully representative of the whole EU as only 23 respondents (out of 80 in total) from 17/30 countries replied to this section.
1. Responses to survey questions concerning Guideline methodology may not be fully representative of the whole EU as only 23 respondents (out of 80 in total) from 17/30 countries replied to this section.
The replies for this section on guideline methodology may not be fully representative of the 30 European countries as only 23 responses from 17 countries were received out of 52 professional society representatives (and a total of 80 respondents including competent authority representatives).
This update was developed by the National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health using NICE guideline methodology.
The guideline committee, whose membership was mostly from the U.S., included clinical, laboratory, and evidence-based guideline methodology experts.
For further details of the guideline methodology there is a link to the full guideline contained in the reference list.
Thus, there is a need for better management and disclosure of conflicts of interest, and greater transparency of guideline methodology.
The new guidelines were developed according to NICE guideline methodology (www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/howwework/developingniceclinicalguidelines/developing_nice_clinical_guidelines.jsp) by the National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health.
The guideline was developed using current NICE guideline methodology, 14 which involved systematic literature searches and critical appraisal and summarising of evidence.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.
Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com