Abstract
Neither breast cancer prevention and early-detection programs, nor their outcomes, are uniform across Europe. This article describes the rationale, methods, and process for development of the European Commission (EC) Initiative on Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis Guidelines. To be consistent with standards set by the Institute of Medicine and others, the EC followed 6 general principles. First, the EC selected, via an open call, a panel with broad representation of areas of expertise. Second, it ensured that all recommendations were supported by systematic reviews. Third, the EC separately considered important subgroups of women, included patient advocates in the guidelines development group, and focused on good communication to inform women's decisions. Fourth, EC rules on conflicts of interest were followed and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to structure the process and minimize the influence of competing interests. Fifth, it focused its recommendations on outcomes that matter to women, and certainty of the evidence is rated for each. Sixth, the EC elicited stakeholder feedback to ensure that the recommendations remain up to date and relevant to practice. This article describes the approach and highlights ways of disseminating and adapting the recommendations both within and outside Europe, using innovative information technology tools.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 273-280 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Annals of Internal Medicine |
| Volume | 171 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Aug 20 2019 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Internal Medicine
Cite this
Methods for development of the european commission initiative on breast cancer guidelines. / Schünemann, Holger J.; Lerda, Donata; Dimitrova, Nadya; Alonso-Coello, Pablo; Gräwingholt, Axel; Quinn, Cecily; Follmann, Markus; Mansel, Robert; Sardanelli, Francesco; Rossi, Paolo Giorgi; Lebeau, Annette; Nyström, Lennarth; Broeders, Mireille; Ioannidou-Mouzaka, Lydia; Duffy, Stephen W.; Borisch, Bettina; Fitzpatrick, Patricia; Hofvind, Solveig; Castells, Xavier; Giordano, Livia; Warman, Sue; Saz-Parkinson, Zuleika.
In: Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 171, No. 4, 20.08.2019, p. 273-280.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Methods for development of the european commission initiative on breast cancer guidelines
AU - Schünemann, Holger J.
AU - Lerda, Donata
AU - Dimitrova, Nadya
AU - Alonso-Coello, Pablo
AU - Gräwingholt, Axel
AU - Quinn, Cecily
AU - Follmann, Markus
AU - Mansel, Robert
AU - Sardanelli, Francesco
AU - Rossi, Paolo Giorgi
AU - Lebeau, Annette
AU - Nyström, Lennarth
AU - Broeders, Mireille
AU - Ioannidou-Mouzaka, Lydia
AU - Duffy, Stephen W.
AU - Borisch, Bettina
AU - Fitzpatrick, Patricia
AU - Hofvind, Solveig
AU - Castells, Xavier
AU - Giordano, Livia
AU - Warman, Sue
AU - Saz-Parkinson, Zuleika
PY - 2019/8/20
Y1 - 2019/8/20
N2 - Neither breast cancer prevention and early-detection programs, nor their outcomes, are uniform across Europe. This article describes the rationale, methods, and process for development of the European Commission (EC) Initiative on Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis Guidelines. To be consistent with standards set by the Institute of Medicine and others, the EC followed 6 general principles. First, the EC selected, via an open call, a panel with broad representation of areas of expertise. Second, it ensured that all recommendations were supported by systematic reviews. Third, the EC separately considered important subgroups of women, included patient advocates in the guidelines development group, and focused on good communication to inform women's decisions. Fourth, EC rules on conflicts of interest were followed and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to structure the process and minimize the influence of competing interests. Fifth, it focused its recommendations on outcomes that matter to women, and certainty of the evidence is rated for each. Sixth, the EC elicited stakeholder feedback to ensure that the recommendations remain up to date and relevant to practice. This article describes the approach and highlights ways of disseminating and adapting the recommendations both within and outside Europe, using innovative information technology tools.
AB - Neither breast cancer prevention and early-detection programs, nor their outcomes, are uniform across Europe. This article describes the rationale, methods, and process for development of the European Commission (EC) Initiative on Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis Guidelines. To be consistent with standards set by the Institute of Medicine and others, the EC followed 6 general principles. First, the EC selected, via an open call, a panel with broad representation of areas of expertise. Second, it ensured that all recommendations were supported by systematic reviews. Third, the EC separately considered important subgroups of women, included patient advocates in the guidelines development group, and focused on good communication to inform women's decisions. Fourth, EC rules on conflicts of interest were followed and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to structure the process and minimize the influence of competing interests. Fifth, it focused its recommendations on outcomes that matter to women, and certainty of the evidence is rated for each. Sixth, the EC elicited stakeholder feedback to ensure that the recommendations remain up to date and relevant to practice. This article describes the approach and highlights ways of disseminating and adapting the recommendations both within and outside Europe, using innovative information technology tools.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071942143&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071942143&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.7326/M18-3445
DO - 10.7326/M18-3445
M3 - Article
C2 - 31330534
AN - SCOPUS:85071942143
VL - 171
SP - 273
EP - 280
JO - Annals of Internal Medicine
JF - Annals of Internal Medicine
SN - 0003-4819
IS - 4
ER -