Home > Journals > Biology and research > Annales de Biologie Clinique > summary
 
      Advanced search    Shopping cart    French version 
 
Latest books
Catalogue/Search
Collections
All journals
Medicine
Biology and research
Annales de Biologie Clinique
- Current issue
- Archives
- Subscribe
- Order an issue
- More information
Public health
Agronomy and biotech.
My account
Forgotten password?
Online account   activation
Subscribe
Licences IP
- Instructions for use
- Estimate request form
- Licence agreement
Order an issue
Pay-per-view articles
Newsletters
How can I publish?
Journals
Books
Help for advertisers
Foreign rights
Book sales agents



 

Texte intégral de l'article
 
Printable version

Practice guidelines: let us sort them


Annales de Biologie Clinique. Volume 67, Number 4, 477-83, juillet-aout 2009, culture-qualité

Résumé   Article gratuit  

Author(s) : C Augereau, J-P Couaillac, D De Mouy, J-F Dézier, M Fonfrède, J-P Lepargneur, A Szymanowicz, J Watine

Summary : A growing number of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) is published. This is understandable because CPG are the corner stone in the evaluation of professional practices (EPP). One cannot deny that EPP is necessary. However, in order for the EPP to reach their objectives, which are to use our resources better and to improve health-care, CPG at our disposal should be of good quality, both in their form and in their content. This is not always the case. What is more, health-care professionals are often not properly trained to distinguish “good” from “not so good” CPG. In this context, the Société française de biologie clinique has created a working group on “CPG and Evidence-Based Laboratory Medicine (EBLM)”. One of the main objectives of our group is to publish critical appraisals of CPG on a regular basis in the Annales de Biologie Clinique (ABC). Thus, the ABC will follow the example set by other medical journals, for example in France: Prescrire. We will more particularly appraise CPGs in relation with laboratory medicine. In this first article, we describe the methods that we will use in order to distinguish “good” from “not so good” CPG. Just like Prescrire as well as like many others, our first tool will be the AGREE instrument, which is quite consensual at an international level. The AGREE tool makes it possible to appraise quite easily, and in a reproducible way, the methodological quality of CPG. We also briefly discuss the more complicated methods that can be used to make judgments about the content of CPG, bearing in mind that equity, patients’ autonomy, balancing risks and benefits, are the four universal principles of medical ethics, that is of good medicine, that is of EB(L)M.

Keywords : recommendations, clinical practice guidelines, evaluation of professional practices, methodological quality, AGREE, medical ethics, ratio between benefits and harms, equity, autonomy, evidence-based laboratory medicine.

 

About us - Contact us - Conditions of use - Secure payment
Latest news - Conferences
Copyright © 2007 John Libbey Eurotext - All rights reserved
[ Legal information - Powered by Dolomède ]