Advertisement

Developing an evidence-based guide to community preventive services—methods12

      Abstract

      Abstract:
      Systematic reviews and evidence-based recommendations are increasingly important for decision making in health and medicine. Over the past 20 years, information on the science of synthesizing research results has exploded. However, some approaches to systematic reviews of the effectiveness of clinical preventive services and medical care may be less appropriate for evaluating population-based interventions. Furthermore, methods for linking evidence to recommendations are less well developed than methods for synthesizing evidence.
      The Guide to Community Preventive Services: Systematic Reviews and Evidence-Based Recommendations (the Guide) will evaluate and make recommendations on population-based and public health interventions. This paper provides an overview of the Guide’s process to systematically review evidence and translate that evidence into recommendations.
      The Guide reviews evidence on effectiveness, the applicability of effectiveness data, (i.e., the extent to which available effectiveness data is thought to apply to additional populations and settings), the intervention’s other effects (i.e., important side effects), economic impact, and barriers to implementation of interventions.
      The steps for obtaining and evaluating evidence into recommendations involve: (1) forming multidisciplinary chapter development teams, (2) developing a conceptual approach to organizing, grouping, selecting and evaluating the interventions in each chapter; (3) selecting interventions to be evaluated; (4) searching for and retrieving evidence; (5) assessing the quality of and summarizing the body of evidence of effectiveness; (6) translating the body of evidence of effectiveness into recommendations; (7) considering information on evidence other than effectiveness; and (8) identifying and summarizing research gaps.
      Systematic reviews of and evidence-based recommendations for population-health interventions are challenging and methods will continue to evolve. However, using an evidence-based approach to identify and recommend effective interventions directed at specific public health goals may reduce errors in how information is collected and interpreted, identify important gaps in current knowledge thus guiding further research, and enhance the Guide users’ ability to assess whether recommendations are valid and prudent from their own perspectives. Over time, all of these advantages could help to increase agreement regarding appropriate community health strategies and help to increase their implementation.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Pappaioanou M.
        • Evans C.
        Development of the Guide to Community Preventive Services.
        J Public Health Mgmt Practice. 1998; 4: 48-54
        • US Preventive Services Task Force
        Guide to clinical preventive services. 2nd ed. International Medical Publishing, Alexandria, VA1996
        • Zaza S.
        • Lawrence R.S.
        • Mahan C.S.
        • et al.
        • Task Force on Community Preventive Services
        Scope and organization of the Guide to Community Preventive Services.
        Am J Prev Med. 2000; 18: 27-34
        • Shefer A.
        • Briss P.
        • Rodewald L.
        • Bernier R.
        • Strikas R.
        • Yusuf H.
        • et al.
        Improving immunization coverage rates.
        Epidemiol Rev. 1999; 20: 96-142
        • Briss P.A.
        • Rodewald L.
        • Hinman A.
        • et al.
        • Task Force on Community Preventive Services
        Reviews of evidence for interventions to improve vaccination coverage in children, adolescents and adults.
        Am J Prev Med. 2000; 18: 97-140
        • Task Force on Community Preventive Services
        Vaccine-preventable diseases.
        MMWR. 1999; 48: 1-16
        • Task Force on Community Preventive Services
        Recommendations on interventions to improve vaccination coverage in children, adolescents and adults.
        Am J Prev Med. 2000; 18: 92-96
      1. Cooper H. Hedges L.V. The handbook of research synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation, New York1994
      2. Mulrow CD, Oxman AD, eds. Cochrane collaboration handbook. In: The Cochrane library [CDROM, updated September 1997]. The Cochrane Collaboration. Oxford: Update Software, 1997:Issue 4.

      3. The Cochrane Collaboration. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 1999 vol 2 [online database]. Available at http://www.updateusa.com/clibip./clib.htm. Accessed July 22, 1999.

      4. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Rockville MD. Evidence-based practice centers: overview, December 1998. Available at: http://www.ahcpr.gov/clinic/epc/. Accessed July 22, 1999.

      5. CDC Guidelines: Improving the Quality. 1996. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.

      6. The Task Force on Community Preventive Services. The guide to community preventive services. Available at: http://web.health.gov/communityguide. Accessed July 22, 1999.

        • Woolf S.H.
        An organized analytic framework for practice guideline development.
        in: McCormick K.A. Moore S.R. Siegel R.A. Clinical practice guideline development methodology perspectives. US Dept. of Health and Human Services, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Washington, DC1994: 105-113
        • Zaza S.
        • Wright-De Agüero L.K.
        • Briss P.A.
        • et al.
        Data collection instrument and procedure for systematic reviews in the Guide to Community Preventive Services.
        Am J Prev Med. 2000; : 44-74
        • Carande-Kulis V.G.
        • Maciosek M.V.
        • Briss P.A.
        • et al.
        • Task Force on Community Preventive Services
        Methods for systematic review of economic evaluations for the Guide to Community Preventive Services.
        Am J Prev Med. 2000; 18: 75-91
      7. Gould M.R. Siegel J.E. Russell L.B. Weinstein M.C. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford University Press, Oxford1996
        • Haddix A.C.
        • Teutsch S.M.
        • Shaffer P.A.
        • Dunet D.O.
        Decision analysis and economic evaluation. Oxford University Press, Oxford1996
        • Novick L.F.
        Public health practice guidelines.
        J Public Health Management and Practice. 1997; 3: 59-64
        • Gyorkos T.W.
        • Tannenbaum T.N.
        • Abrahamowicz M.
        • Oxman M.D.
        • Scott E.A.F.
        • Millson M.E.
        • et al.
        An approach to the development of practice guidelines for community health interventions.
        Can J Public Health. 1994; 85: S8-S13
        • Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination
        Canadian guide to clinical, preventive health care. Canada Communication Group, Ottawa, Canada1994
        • Murray D.M.
        Design and analysis of group-randomized trials.
        Ann Epidemiol. 1999; 7: S69-S77
        • Rothman K.J.
        Modern epidemiology. Little, Brown, and Company, Boston1986
      8. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials 1995;16:621–13.

        • Moher D.
        • Pham B.
        • Jones A.
        • et al.
        Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?.
        Lancet. 1998; 352: 609-613
        • Wortman P.M.
        Judging research quality.
        in: Cooper H. Hedges L.V. The handbook of research synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation, New York1994: 97-109
        • Dickersin K.
        • Min Y.I.
        • Meinert C.L.
        Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards.
        JAMA. 1992; 267: 374-378