Using patient values and preferences to inform the importance of health outcomes in practice guideline development following the GRADE approach

Yuan Zhang, Pablo Alonso Coello, Jan Brozek, Wojtek Wiercioch, Itziar Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta, Elie A. Akl, Joerg J. Meerpohl, Waleed Alhazzani, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Rebecca L. Morgan, Reem A. Mustafa, John J. Riva, Ainsley Moore, Juan José Yepes-Nuñez, Carlos Cuello-Garcia, Zulfa AlRayees, Veena Manja, Maicon Falavigna, Ignacio Neumann, Romina Brignardello-Petersen & 8 others Nancy Santesso, Bram Rochwerg, Andrea Darzi, Maria Ximena Rojas, Yaser Adi, Claudia Bollig, Reem Waziry, Holger J. Schünemann

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: There are diverse opinions and confusion about defining and including patient values and preferences (i.e. the importance people place on the health outcomes) in the guideline development processes. This article aims to provide an overview of a process for systematically incorporating values and preferences in guideline development. Methods: In 2013 and 2014, we followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to adopt, adapt and develop 226 recommendations in 22 guidelines for the Ministry of Health of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. To collect context-specific values and preferences for each recommendation, we performed systematic reviews, asked clinical experts to provide feedback according to their clinical experience, and consulted patient representatives. Results: We found several types of studies addressing the importance of outcomes, including those reporting utilities, non-utility measures of health states based on structured questionnaires or scales, and qualitative studies. Guideline panels used the relative importance of outcomes based on values and preferences to weigh the balance of desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative intervention options. However, we found few studies addressing local values and preferences. Conclusions: Currently there are different but no firmly established processes for integrating patient values and preferences in healthcare decision-making of practice guideline development. With GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks, we provide an empirical strategy to find and incorporate values and preferences in guidelines by performing systematic reviews and eliciting information from guideline panel members and patient representatives. However, more research and practical guidance are needed on how to search for relevant studies and grey literature, assess the certainty of this evidence, and best summarize and present the findings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number52
JournalHealth and Quality of Life Outcomes
Volume15
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Patient Preference
Practice Guidelines
Guidelines
Health
Patient Advocacy
Literature
Saudi Arabia
Decision Making
Delivery of Health Care
Research

Keywords

  • Evidence to decision
  • Guideline development
  • Outcome importance
  • Patient preferences
  • Patient values
  • Systematic review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Using patient values and preferences to inform the importance of health outcomes in practice guideline development following the GRADE approach. / Zhang, Yuan; Coello, Pablo Alonso; Brozek, Jan; Wiercioch, Wojtek; Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta, Itziar; Akl, Elie A.; Meerpohl, Joerg J.; Alhazzani, Waleed; Carrasco-Labra, Alonso; Morgan, Rebecca L.; Mustafa, Reem A.; Riva, John J.; Moore, Ainsley; Yepes-Nuñez, Juan José; Cuello-Garcia, Carlos; AlRayees, Zulfa; Manja, Veena; Falavigna, Maicon; Neumann, Ignacio; Brignardello-Petersen, Romina; Santesso, Nancy; Rochwerg, Bram; Darzi, Andrea; Rojas, Maria Ximena; Adi, Yaser; Bollig, Claudia; Waziry, Reem; Schünemann, Holger J.

In: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, Vol. 15, No. 1, 52, 02.05.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zhang, Y, Coello, PA, Brozek, J, Wiercioch, W, Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta, I, Akl, EA, Meerpohl, JJ, Alhazzani, W, Carrasco-Labra, A, Morgan, RL, Mustafa, RA, Riva, JJ, Moore, A, Yepes-Nuñez, JJ, Cuello-Garcia, C, AlRayees, Z, Manja, V, Falavigna, M, Neumann, I, Brignardello-Petersen, R, Santesso, N, Rochwerg, B, Darzi, A, Rojas, MX, Adi, Y, Bollig, C, Waziry, R & Schünemann, HJ 2017, 'Using patient values and preferences to inform the importance of health outcomes in practice guideline development following the GRADE approach', Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, vol. 15, no. 1, 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0621-0
Zhang, Yuan ; Coello, Pablo Alonso ; Brozek, Jan ; Wiercioch, Wojtek ; Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta, Itziar ; Akl, Elie A. ; Meerpohl, Joerg J. ; Alhazzani, Waleed ; Carrasco-Labra, Alonso ; Morgan, Rebecca L. ; Mustafa, Reem A. ; Riva, John J. ; Moore, Ainsley ; Yepes-Nuñez, Juan José ; Cuello-Garcia, Carlos ; AlRayees, Zulfa ; Manja, Veena ; Falavigna, Maicon ; Neumann, Ignacio ; Brignardello-Petersen, Romina ; Santesso, Nancy ; Rochwerg, Bram ; Darzi, Andrea ; Rojas, Maria Ximena ; Adi, Yaser ; Bollig, Claudia ; Waziry, Reem ; Schünemann, Holger J. / Using patient values and preferences to inform the importance of health outcomes in practice guideline development following the GRADE approach. In: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2017 ; Vol. 15, No. 1.
@article{5c59d44ce0e64712bec1dfcd174739ff,
title = "Using patient values and preferences to inform the importance of health outcomes in practice guideline development following the GRADE approach",
abstract = "Background: There are diverse opinions and confusion about defining and including patient values and preferences (i.e. the importance people place on the health outcomes) in the guideline development processes. This article aims to provide an overview of a process for systematically incorporating values and preferences in guideline development. Methods: In 2013 and 2014, we followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to adopt, adapt and develop 226 recommendations in 22 guidelines for the Ministry of Health of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. To collect context-specific values and preferences for each recommendation, we performed systematic reviews, asked clinical experts to provide feedback according to their clinical experience, and consulted patient representatives. Results: We found several types of studies addressing the importance of outcomes, including those reporting utilities, non-utility measures of health states based on structured questionnaires or scales, and qualitative studies. Guideline panels used the relative importance of outcomes based on values and preferences to weigh the balance of desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative intervention options. However, we found few studies addressing local values and preferences. Conclusions: Currently there are different but no firmly established processes for integrating patient values and preferences in healthcare decision-making of practice guideline development. With GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks, we provide an empirical strategy to find and incorporate values and preferences in guidelines by performing systematic reviews and eliciting information from guideline panel members and patient representatives. However, more research and practical guidance are needed on how to search for relevant studies and grey literature, assess the certainty of this evidence, and best summarize and present the findings.",
keywords = "Evidence to decision, Guideline development, Outcome importance, Patient preferences, Patient values, Systematic review",
author = "Yuan Zhang and Coello, {Pablo Alonso} and Jan Brozek and Wojtek Wiercioch and Itziar Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta and Akl, {Elie A.} and Meerpohl, {Joerg J.} and Waleed Alhazzani and Alonso Carrasco-Labra and Morgan, {Rebecca L.} and Mustafa, {Reem A.} and Riva, {John J.} and Ainsley Moore and Yepes-Nu{\~n}ez, {Juan Jos{\'e}} and Carlos Cuello-Garcia and Zulfa AlRayees and Veena Manja and Maicon Falavigna and Ignacio Neumann and Romina Brignardello-Petersen and Nancy Santesso and Bram Rochwerg and Andrea Darzi and Rojas, {Maria Ximena} and Yaser Adi and Claudia Bollig and Reem Waziry and Sch{\"u}nemann, {Holger J.}",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1186/s12955-017-0621-0",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
journal = "Health and Quality of Life Outcomes",
issn = "1477-7525",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Using patient values and preferences to inform the importance of health outcomes in practice guideline development following the GRADE approach

AU - Zhang, Yuan

AU - Coello, Pablo Alonso

AU - Brozek, Jan

AU - Wiercioch, Wojtek

AU - Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta, Itziar

AU - Akl, Elie A.

AU - Meerpohl, Joerg J.

AU - Alhazzani, Waleed

AU - Carrasco-Labra, Alonso

AU - Morgan, Rebecca L.

AU - Mustafa, Reem A.

AU - Riva, John J.

AU - Moore, Ainsley

AU - Yepes-Nuñez, Juan José

AU - Cuello-Garcia, Carlos

AU - AlRayees, Zulfa

AU - Manja, Veena

AU - Falavigna, Maicon

AU - Neumann, Ignacio

AU - Brignardello-Petersen, Romina

AU - Santesso, Nancy

AU - Rochwerg, Bram

AU - Darzi, Andrea

AU - Rojas, Maria Ximena

AU - Adi, Yaser

AU - Bollig, Claudia

AU - Waziry, Reem

AU - Schünemann, Holger J.

PY - 2017/5/2

Y1 - 2017/5/2

N2 - Background: There are diverse opinions and confusion about defining and including patient values and preferences (i.e. the importance people place on the health outcomes) in the guideline development processes. This article aims to provide an overview of a process for systematically incorporating values and preferences in guideline development. Methods: In 2013 and 2014, we followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to adopt, adapt and develop 226 recommendations in 22 guidelines for the Ministry of Health of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. To collect context-specific values and preferences for each recommendation, we performed systematic reviews, asked clinical experts to provide feedback according to their clinical experience, and consulted patient representatives. Results: We found several types of studies addressing the importance of outcomes, including those reporting utilities, non-utility measures of health states based on structured questionnaires or scales, and qualitative studies. Guideline panels used the relative importance of outcomes based on values and preferences to weigh the balance of desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative intervention options. However, we found few studies addressing local values and preferences. Conclusions: Currently there are different but no firmly established processes for integrating patient values and preferences in healthcare decision-making of practice guideline development. With GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks, we provide an empirical strategy to find and incorporate values and preferences in guidelines by performing systematic reviews and eliciting information from guideline panel members and patient representatives. However, more research and practical guidance are needed on how to search for relevant studies and grey literature, assess the certainty of this evidence, and best summarize and present the findings.

AB - Background: There are diverse opinions and confusion about defining and including patient values and preferences (i.e. the importance people place on the health outcomes) in the guideline development processes. This article aims to provide an overview of a process for systematically incorporating values and preferences in guideline development. Methods: In 2013 and 2014, we followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to adopt, adapt and develop 226 recommendations in 22 guidelines for the Ministry of Health of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. To collect context-specific values and preferences for each recommendation, we performed systematic reviews, asked clinical experts to provide feedback according to their clinical experience, and consulted patient representatives. Results: We found several types of studies addressing the importance of outcomes, including those reporting utilities, non-utility measures of health states based on structured questionnaires or scales, and qualitative studies. Guideline panels used the relative importance of outcomes based on values and preferences to weigh the balance of desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative intervention options. However, we found few studies addressing local values and preferences. Conclusions: Currently there are different but no firmly established processes for integrating patient values and preferences in healthcare decision-making of practice guideline development. With GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks, we provide an empirical strategy to find and incorporate values and preferences in guidelines by performing systematic reviews and eliciting information from guideline panel members and patient representatives. However, more research and practical guidance are needed on how to search for relevant studies and grey literature, assess the certainty of this evidence, and best summarize and present the findings.

KW - Evidence to decision

KW - Guideline development

KW - Outcome importance

KW - Patient preferences

KW - Patient values

KW - Systematic review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85018387312&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85018387312&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12955-017-0621-0

DO - 10.1186/s12955-017-0621-0

M3 - Article

VL - 15

JO - Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

JF - Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

SN - 1477-7525

IS - 1

M1 - 52

ER -