Methods underpinning national clinical guidelines for hypertension: describing the evidence shortfall

BMC Health Serv Res. 2006 Apr 5;6:47. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-47.

Abstract

Background: To be useful, clinical practice guidelines need to be evidence based; otherwise they will not achieve the validity, reliability and credibility required for implementation.

Methods: This paper compares the methods used in gathering, analysing and linking of evidence to guideline recommendations in ten current hypertension guidelines.

Results: It found several guidelines had failed to implement methods of searching for the relevant literature, critical analysis and linking to recommendations that minimise the risk of bias in the interpretation of research evidence. The more rigorous guidelines showed discrepancies in recommendations and grading that reflected different approaches to the use of evidence in guideline development.

Conclusion: Clinical practice guidelines as a methodology are clearly still an evolving health care technology.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Validation Study

MeSH terms

  • Algorithms
  • Antihypertensive Agents / administration & dosage
  • Diet, Sodium-Restricted
  • Evidence-Based Medicine / methods
  • Evidence-Based Medicine / standards*
  • Humans
  • Hypertension / diagnosis
  • Hypertension / diet therapy
  • Hypertension / drug therapy
  • Hypertension / prevention & control*
  • Internationality
  • Life Style
  • Meta-Analysis as Topic*
  • Practice Guidelines as Topic / standards*
  • Quality of Life
  • Review Literature as Topic

Substances

  • Antihypertensive Agents