Dec 262011

The Institute of Medicine has issued stern new guidelines on guideline development. Apparently a good portion of the 2,700 clinical practice guidelines in the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality's database are not based on a foundation of good evidence, do not acknowledge when the evidence is shaky, and their authors often have financial conflicts of interest.

The IOM calls for transparency and a rigorous evidence-based approach, and prohibition of COI in guideline chairpeople -- with COI defined beyond industry bedfellowship to include board certification in any subspecialty, since self-interested guideline-crafting could potentially boost revenues within a practice specialty. (Of course, this begs the question, who will actually write the guidelines, if not the experts?) JAMA 2011;305(18):1846-1848.

Liked this post? Get a weekly email update, and explore our library of clinical guidelines, practice updatesreview articles. and board review questions.

PulmCCM is an independent publication not affiliated with or endorsed by any other organization, society or journal referenced on the website. (Terms of Use | Privacy Policy)

Authors: contribute your work in a guest post.


Citing COI, IOM issues guidelines for new guidelines