Guideline Panel Research Articles

A Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline: a systematic review and recommendations on advance care planning and shared decision-making

BackgroundIn paediatric palliative care, children with life-threatening and life-limiting conditions, their families, and their health care professionals often face difficult decisions about treatment, goals of care, and delivery of care. Advance care planning and shared decision-making are strategies that can improve quality of care by discussing goals and preferences on future care. In this paper, we provide recommendations that aim to optimise advance care planning and shared decision-making in paediatric palliative care in the Netherlands.MethodsA multidisciplinary guideline panel of 20 experts in paediatric palliative care and nine (bereaved) parents was established to develop recommendations on advance care planning and shared decision-making. We performed systematic literature searches to identify quantitative and qualitative evidence and used the GRADE (CERQual) methodology for appraisal of evidence. Recommendations were formulated based on quantitative and qualitative evidence, clinical expertise, and patient and family experiences.ResultsWe identified 4 RCTs that reported on the effect of advance care planning interventions in paediatric palliative care and 33 qualitative studies on barriers and facilitators to advance care planning and shared decision-making. We formulated 28 strong recommendations in close collaboration with a multidisciplinary guideline panel that provide guidance to offer advance care planning and shared decision-making, involve children and their family, and communicate information about care and treatment.ConclusionThe identified evidence and recommendations support the use of advance care planning and shared decision-making in paediatric palliative care. However, we found several knowledge gaps that should be addressed. As advance care planning and shared decision-making require specific skills and can be time-consuming, we emphasise the importance of education, adequate staffing and sufficient funding to improve integration in clinical practice. We do believe that our recommendations can be used as a starting point to develop recommendations in other countries. However, country-specific factors should be very carefully considered before applying any recommendations in other countries.

Red cell specifications for blood group matching in patients with haemoglobinopathies: An updated systematic review and clinical practice guideline from the International Collaboration for Transfusion Medicine Guidelines.

Red blood cell (RBC) antigen matching beyond ABO and RhD is commonly recommended for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) and thalassaemia. We present an updated systematic literature review to inform evidence-based guidelines on RBC matching. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to develop recommendations. Six new observational studies (4 prospective, 2 retrospective) were identified. The six studies reported on 583 patients in total, including cross-over designs, with sample sizes from 10 to 343. Studies were heterogeneous, utilising varying degrees of RBC matching and different definitions for 'extended' matching. All reported on alloimmunisation. One study reported on molecular matching. The reported prevalence of alloimmunisation using limited matching was 0%-50% and with extended matching was 0%-24%. Eighty-two patients were alloimmunised before study entry. The risk of bias across studies was moderate to critical. The guideline panel recommends that ABO, RhDCcEe, and K-compatible RBCs are selected for individuals with SCD and thalassaemia, even in the absence of alloantibodies, and that RBCs which are antigen-negative to already existing clinically significant antibodies are chosen. There is a need for comparative research to define the benefit, impact, cost-effectiveness, and feasibility of extended RBC matching strategies to prevent alloimmunisation.

HIV risk assessment tools for identifying individuals who could benefit from pre-exposure prophylaxis: a systematic review protocol

BackgroundPre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effective, safe and acceptable intervention for preventing HIV infection. However, identifying individuals who could best benefit from PrEP remains a significant challenge. Existing HIV...

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on the Management of COVID-19: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody Pemivibart for Pre-exposure Prophylaxis.

This article provides a focused update to the clinical practice guideline on the treatment and management of patients with coronavirus disease 2019, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. The guideline panel presents a recommendation on the use of the anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 neutralizing antibody pemivibart as pre-exposure prophylaxis. The recommendation is based on evidence derived from a systematic review and adheres to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Information on pemivibart is included in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorization for this agent.

Italian guidelines for age range and test interval in breast cancer screening programmes: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT of the European guidelines.

A guideline panel formulated a set of recommendations for breast cancer screening and diagnosis to implement clinical activities in Italy in alignment with the European Breast Cancer Guidelines on Screening and Diagnosis (European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer-ECIBC). The panel issued national recommendations through adopting, adapting, and/or developing recommendations from the European guidelines (ADOLOPMENT approach). This process utilizes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence to decision (EtD) framework. An additional PubMed search was conducted using search terms specific to Italy to tailor the EU guidelines to the national context. Nine articles were included as contextual evidence in the EtD. A total of 13 recommendations were finalized, either adapted or adopted to suit the national context. Organized breast cancer screening is strongly recommended for women aged 50-69 every 2 years, and it is conditionally recommended every 3 years for women aged 70-74, as well as every 1 or 2 years for women aged 45-49. Annual mammography received a strong recommendation against for women aged 50 and older. Developing shared national guidelines for the management of mammography screening will improve the standardization of processes across all settings, thereby promoting health equity.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation to Spanish of the PANELVIEW instrument to evaluate the health guidelines development process

ObjectivesThe PANELVIEW questionnaire identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the process and methods used for developing health guidelines from the guideline development group's perspective. To expand its use, PANELVIEW ideally should be available in different languages. We aimed to cross-culturally adapt PANELVIEW into Spanish and assess its acceptability, validity, and reliability. Study Design and SettingTo translate and culturally adapt PANELVIEW to Spanish, we followed International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research's Translation and Cultural Adaptation Good Practice Principles guidelines. The process consisted of 1) forward and back translation, 2) input from an expert panel, and 3) cognitive debriefing interviews. We assessed the content validity with experts in guideline development who rated instrument items for relevance to determine the item content validity index and scale content validity index (I-CVI and S-CVI). We tested the reliability with health guidelines panels from Spanish-speaking countries and measured internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha). We examined acceptability through the number of missing responses for each item. ResultsThe content comparison between the back-translation and the original version showed that most items (24/34) were conceptually equivalent but with grammatical differences. Through the cognitive interviews, we identified six items with wording issues, ten with clarity issues, and two with applicability issues. I-CVI ranged from 0.77 to 1.00, with two items needing revision. S-CVI was 0.92, showing excellent content validity. The PANELVIEW Spanish version demonstrated very good reliability (Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.96). Panel members responded to all items, showing good acceptability. ConclusionThe PANELVIEW Spanish version was conceptually equivalent to the original version and provided satisfactory evidence of acceptability, validity and reliability.

Co-creation of a step-by-step guide for specifying the test-management pathway to formulate focused guideline questions about healthcare related tests

BackgroundGuideline development on testing is known to be difficult for guideline developers. It requires consideration of various aspects, such as accuracy, purpose of testing, and consequences on management and people-important outcomes. This can be outlined in a test-management pathway. We aimed to create and user-test a step-by-step guide for guideline developers for designing a test-management pathway.MethodsDevelopmental design with a co-creative strategy. We created a draft step-by-step guide, that was user tested in a workshop with 19 experts, and by interviewing 7 guideline panel members.ResultsOur proposed guide consists of five blocks of signalling questions: patients/population, index test(s), current practice/comparison/control, people-important outcomes, and the link between testing and outcome(s). The user testing led to refinement of the signalling questions, the use of inclusive terminology, and addition of a test-management pathway figure with detailed explanation.ConclusionsThe step-by-step guide for formulating focused guideline questions regarding healthcare related testing can help in identifying relevant characteristics of the population, tests, and outcomes and to create a test management pathway. This should facilitate the formulation of evidence-based guideline recommendations about healthcare related testing.

Using the WHO-INTEGRATE framework to develop a COVID-19 guideline for schools, Germany.

At the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, reliable, globally applicable recommendations for safe and continuous school operations were lacking. In October 2020, the German Association of Scientific Medical Societies' task force for COVID-19 guidelines and public health researchers at Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München initiated the rapid development of a living evidence- and consensus-based guideline to reduce severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission in schools. To facilitate transparent, structured and comprehensive decision-making with a whole-of-society perspective, they applied the WHO-INTEGRATE evidence-to-decision framework. This framework supported a broad, multisectoral composition of the guideline panel. The panel used newly synthesized evidence on nine school measures. Participating medical societies or the guideline secretariat completed evidence-to-decision tables. They also drafted recommendations for the guideline panel, who discussed and revised them during moderated consensus conferences. In Germany, each state is responsible for organizing schooling. The German Association of Scientific Medical Societies coordinates development of evidence- and consensus-based guidelines. The first version of the guideline was published in February 2021, and the guideline dissemination created much media attention. Of the 16 state education ministries, almost all knew about the guideline, nine recognized it as a relevant source of information and five used it to check existing directives. The WHO-INTEGRATE framework facilitated a comprehensive assessment of school measures from the start of guideline development, considering the broad societal impact of the measures. Using the framework in rapid mode was feasible, but it fell short of its potential.

National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel: Perspectives and Lessons Learned.

In March 2020, the White House Coronavirus Task Force determined that clinicians in the United States needed expert treatment guidelines to optimally manage patients with COVID-19, a potentially life-threatening disease caused by a new pathogen for which no specific treatments were known to be effective. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services requested that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) take the lead in expeditiously convening a panel of experts to create "living" guidelines that would be widely accessible and capable of frequent updating as important new information became available. The purpose of this article is to expand on the experiences of the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) over the past 4 years, summarize the Panel's final recommendations for COVID-19, highlight some challenges and unanswered questions about COVID-19 management, and inform future responses to public health emergencies. The Panel was formed in March 2020, and the first iteration of the guidelines was released in April 2020. Now that the public health emergency has ended, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines have sunsetted. This role will now fall to professional societies and organizations, such as the American College of Physicians, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, and the World Health Organization, all of which have been active in this area.

Artificial Intelligence-Supported Development of Health Guideline Questions.

Guideline questions are typically proposed by experts. To assess how large language models (LLMs) can support the development of guideline questions, providing insights on approaches and lessons learned. Two approaches for guideline question generation were assessed: 1) identification of questions conveyed by online search queries and 2) direct generation of guideline questions by LLMs. For the former, the researchers retrieved popular queries on allergic rhinitis using Google Trends (GT) and identified those conveying questions using both manual and LLM-based methods. They then manually structured as guideline questions the queries that conveyed relevant questions. For the second approach, they tasked an LLM with proposing guideline questions, assuming the role of either a patient or a clinician. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) 2024 guidelines. None. Frequency of relevant questions generated. The authors retrieved 3975 unique queries using GT. From these, they identified 37 questions, of which 22 had not been previously posed by guideline panel members and 2 were eventually prioritized by the panel. Direct interactions with LLMs resulted in the generation of 22 unique relevant questions (11 not previously suggested by panel members), and 4 were eventually prioritized by the panel. In total, 6 of 39 final questions prioritized for the 2024 ARIA guidelines were not initially thought of by the panel. The researchers provide a set of practical insights on the implementation of their approaches based on the lessons learned. Single case study (ARIA guidelines). Approaches using LLMs can support the development of guideline questions, complementing traditional methods and potentially augmenting questions prioritized by guideline panels. Fraunhofer Cluster of Excellence for Immune-Mediated Diseases.

Atopic Dermatitis (Eczema) Guidelines 2023: Highlights

Atopic Dermatitis (AD) is one of the most common chronic inflammatory skin disorders with a complex pathogenesis. AD is characterized by eczematous skin lesions, pruritus, and recurrent skin infections; with negative impact on patients (and caregivers) quality of life.The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI)/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI) Joint Task Force (JTF) Atopic Dermatitis Guideline Panel recently released updated AD guidelines. This guideline focuses on addressing clinical questions using trustworthy guideline development standards, including mitigating the potential influence of financial and non-financial conflicts of interest, and GRADE methodology. A multidisciplinary panel used systematic reviews and meta-analyses to inform specific recommendations addressing optimal use of (1) topical treatments, (2) dilute bleach bath, (3) dietary avoidance/elimination, (4) allergen immunotherapy and (5) systemic treatments. The comprehensive recommendations, emphasizing the third principle of evidence-based medicine - that evidence alone is never enough; that patient values and preferences must be carefully considered when determining optimal treatments for patients and populations - provide a framework to support clinicians in selecting an optimal treatment plan for each patient.This review provides an overview of the guideline and discusses how those recommendations relate to current practice.

Conflicts of interest in clinical practice: lessons learned from cardiovascular medicine.

Cardiovascular diseases represent a major burden worldwide, and clinical trials are critical to define treatment improvements. Since various conflicts of interest (COIs) may influence trials at multiple levels, cardiovascular research represents a paradigmatic example to analyze their effects and manage them effectively to re-establish the centrality of evidence-based medicine.Despite the manifest role of industry, COIs may differently affect both sponsored and non-sponsored studies in many ways. COIs influence may start from the research question, data collection and adjudication, up to result reporting, including the spin phenomenon. Outcomes and endpoints (especially composite) choice and definitions also represent potential sources for COIs interference. Since large randomized controlled trials significantly influence international guidelines, thus impacting also clinical practice, their critical assessment for COIs is mandatory. Despite specific protocols aimed to mitigate COI influence, even scientific societies and guideline panels may not be totally free from COIs, negatively affecting their accountability and trustworthiness.Shared rules, awareness of COI mechanisms and transparency with external data access may help promoting evidence-based research and mitigate COIs impact. Managing COIs effectively should preserve public trust in the cardiovascular profession without compromising the positive relationships between investigators and industry.

MATCH‐IT: A decision support tool for multiple comparisons presenting data from network meta‐analysis to facilitate guideline development

AbstractIntroductionNetwork meta‐analysis (NMA) provides unprecedented opportunities to compare multiple treatment options (multiple comparisons) and are increasingly being used to inform clinical practice guidelines. However, the overwhelming amount of data generated from NMAs is challenging to present in comprehensible overviews for end‐users, guideline panelists included. Acknowledging these challenges, we developed MATCH‐IT—an interactive evidence summary displaying NMA results for multiple comparisons. In this study, we conducted user‐testing and further developed MATCH‐IT to support guideline panels in moving from NMA evidence to recommendations.MethodsWe user‐tested the tool with guideline panelists and observed the use of the tool in panel meetings. User‐testing sessions and guideline meetings were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed. The analysis informed the iterative development in the tool.ResultsWe included four guideline panels and tested the tool with 15 panelists (four chairs, four methodologists, five clinical experts and two patient partners). User testing revealed both positive aspects and limitations of the tool. Interactivity allowed for dynamic display of the evidence during panels meetings and was highlighted as valuable. Further, participants felt that the tool provided overview of complex evidence, further facilitated by categorization of effects through colour coding. The inclusion of information on burden of treatment was highlighted as relevant and valuable. Regarding limitations, some users had issues discovering the interactive features. Earlier versions of MATCH‐IT did not include sufficiently detailed information, such as the imprecision of effect estimates, which the users felt was needed for decision making. These findings led to refinements of the tool, including a new tutorial, inclusion of confidence intervals, and a new layer displaying more detailed information.DiscussionOur study suggests that MATCH‐IT may play a role in facilitating guideline development by easing understanding of NMA evidence and alleviating information overload in guideline panelists.

European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases/European Committee on infection control clinical guidelines on pre-operative decolonization and targeted prophylaxis in patients colonized by multidrug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria before surgery

ScopeThe aim of these guidelines is to provide recommendations for decolonization and perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) in multidrug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria (MDR-GPB) adult carriers before inpatient surgery. MethodsThese European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases/European Committee on Infection Control guidelines were developed following a systematic review of published studies targeting methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococci, methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci, and pan-drug-resistant-GPB. Critical outcomes were the occurrence of surgical site infections (SSIs) caused by the colonizing MDR-GPB and SSIs-attributable mortality. Important outcomes included the occurrence of SSIs caused by any pathogen, hospital-acquired infections, all-cause mortality, and adverse events associated with the interventions, including resistance development to the agents used and the incidence of Clostridioides difficile infections. The last search of all databases was performed on 1 November 2023. The level of evidence and the strength of each recommendation were defined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Consensus of a multidisciplinary expert panel was reached for the final list of recommendations. Antimicrobial stewardship considerations were included. RecommendationsThe guideline panel reviewed the impact of decolonization, targeted PAP, and combined interventions (e.g. decolonization and targeted PAP) on the risk of SSIs and other outcomes in MDR-GPB carriers, according to the type of bacteria and type of surgery.We recommend screening for S. aureus before high-risk operations, such as cardiothoracic and orthopaedic surgery. Decolonization with intranasal mupirocin with or without a chlorhexidine bath is recommended in patients colonized with S. aureus before cardiothoracic and orthopaedic surgery and suggested in other surgeries. The addition of vancomycin to standard prophylaxis is suggested for MRSA carriers in cardiothoracic surgery, orthopaedic surgery, and neurosurgery. Combined interventions (e.g. decolonization and targeted prophylaxis) are suggested for MRSA carriers undergoing cardiothoracic and orthopaedic surgery. No recommendation could be made regarding screening, decolonization and targeted prophylaxis for vancomycin-resistant enterococci because of the lack of data. No evidence was retrieved for methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci and pan-drug-resistant-GPB. Careful consideration of the laboratory workload and involvement of antimicrobial stewardship and infection control teams are warranted before implementing screening procedures or performing changes in PAP policy. Future research should focus on novel decolonizing techniques, on the monitoring of resistance to decolonizing agents and PAP regimens, and on standardized combined interventions in high-quality studies.

Summary of Japanese clinical practice guidelines for Bell's palsy (idiopathic facial palsy) - 2023 update edited by the Japan Society of Facial Nerve Research

ObjectiveThe “Summary of Japanese clinical practice guidelines for Bell's palsy (idiopathic facial palsy) - 2023 update edited by the Japan Society of Facial Nerve Research” aims to review the latest evidence regarding the treatment of Bell's palsy and to provide appropriate recommendations. MethodRegarding the treatment of Bell's palsy, a guideline panel identified key clinical questions using an analytic PICO framework. The panel produced recommendations following the standards for trustworthy guidelines and the GRADE approach. The panel considered the balance of benefits, harm, and preferences when making recommendations. ResultsThe panel identified nine key clinical questions: systemic (high/standard dose) corticosteroids, intratympanic corticosteroids, systemic antivirals, decompression surgery, acupuncture, physical therapy, botulinum toxin, and reanimation surgery. ConclusionThese guidelines strongly recommend systemic standard-dose corticosteroids for the clinical management of Bell's palsy. Other treatments are weakly recommended due to insufficient evidence. The absolute risk reduction of each treatment differed according to the disease severity. Therefore, physicians and patients should decide on treatment based on the disease severity.

European society of clinical microbiology and infectious diseases guidelines for antimicrobial stewardship in emergency departments (endorsed by European association of hospital pharmacists)

ScopeThis European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to support a selection of appropriate antibiotic use practices for patients seen in the emergency department (ED) and guidance for their implementation. The topics addressed in this guideline are (a) Do biomarkers or rapid pathogen tests improve antibiotic prescribing and/or clinical outcomes? (b) Does taking blood cultures in common infectious syndromes improve antibiotic prescribing and/or clinical outcomes? (c) Does watchful waiting without antibacterial therapy or with delayed antibiotic prescribing reduce antibiotic prescribing without worsening clinical outcomes in patients with specific infectious syndromes? (d) Do structured culture follow-up programs in patients discharged from the ED with cultures pending improve antibiotic prescribing? MethodsAn expert panel was convened by European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases and the guideline chair. The panel selected in consensus the four most relevant antimicrobial stewardship topics according to pre-defined relevance criteria. For each main question for the four topics, a systematic review was performed, including randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Both clinical outcomes and stewardship process outcomes related to antibiotic use were deemed relevant. The literature searches were conducted between May 2021 and March 2022. In April 2022, the panel members were formally asked to suggest additional studies that were not identified in the initial searches. Data were summarized in a meta-analysis if possible or otherwise summarized narratively. The certainty of the evidence was classified according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. The guideline panel reviewed the evidence per topic critically appraising the evidence and formulated recommendations through a consensus-based process. The strength of the recommendations was classified as strong or weak. To substantiate the implementation process, implementation trials or observational studies describing facilitators/barriers for implementation were identified from the same searches and were summarized narratively. RecommendationsThe recommendations on the use of biomarkers and rapid pathogen diagnostic tests focus on the initiation of antibiotics in patients admitted through the ED. Their effect on the discontinuation or de-escalation of antibiotics during hospital stay was not reported, neither was their effect on hospital infection prevention and control practices. The recommendations on watchful waiting (i.e. withholding antibiotics with some form of follow-up) focus on specific infectious syndromes for which the primary care literature was also included. The recommendations on blood cultures focus on the indication in three common infectious syndromes in the ED explicitly excluding patients with sepsis or septic shock. Most recommendations are based on very low and low certainty of evidence, leading to weak recommendations or, when no evidence was available, to best practice statements. Implementation of these recommendations needs to be adapted to the specific settings and circumstances of the ED. The scarcity of high-quality studies in the area of antimicrobial stewardship in the ED highlights the need for future research in this field.

Society of Critical Care Medicine and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Guideline for the Prevention of Stress-Related Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Critically Ill Adults.

Critically ill adults can develop stress-related mucosal damage from gastrointestinal hypoperfusion and reperfusion injury, predisposing them to clinically important stress-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The objective of this guideline was to develop evidence-based recommendations for the prevention of UGIB in adults in the ICU. A multiprofessional panel of 18 international experts from dietetics, critical care medicine, nursing, and pharmacy, and two methodologists developed evidence-based recommendations in alignment with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Conflict-of-interest policies were strictly followed during all phases of guideline development including task force selection and voting. The panel members identified and formulated 13 Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome questions. We conducted a systematic review for each question to identify the best available evidence, statistically analyzed the evidence, and then assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate the recommendations. Good practice statements were included to provide additional guidance. The panel generated nine conditional recommendations and made four good practice statements. Factors that likely increase the risk for clinically important stress-related UGIB in critically ill adults include coagulopathy, shock, and chronic liver disease. There is no firm evidence for mechanical ventilation alone being a risk factor. Enteral nutrition probably reduces UGIB risk. All critically ill adults with factors that likely increase the risk for stress-related UGIB should receive either proton pump inhibitors or histamine-2 receptor antagonists, at low dosage regimens, to prevent UGIB. Prophylaxis should be discontinued when critical illness is no longer evident or the risk factor(s) is no longer present despite ongoing critical illness. Discontinuation of stress ulcer prophylaxis before transfer out of the ICU is necessary to prevent inappropriate prescribing. The guideline panel achieved consensus regarding the recommendations for the prevention of stress-related UGIB. These recommendations are intended for consideration along with the patient's existing clinical status.

A Systematic Review Supporting the Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guidelines on Vitamin D.

Low vitamin D status is common and is associated with various common medical conditions. To support the development of the Endocrine Society's Clinical Practice Guideline on Vitamin D for the Prevention of Disease. We searched multiple databases for studies that addressed 14 clinical questions prioritized by the guideline panel. Of the 14 questions, 10 clinical questions assessed the effect of vitamin D vs no vitamin D in the general population throughout the lifespan, during pregnancy, and in adults with prediabetes; 1 question assessed dosing; and 3 questions addressed screening with serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess certainty of evidence. Electronic searches yielded 37 007 citations, from which we included 151 studies. In children and adolescents, low-certainty evidence suggested reduction in respiratory tract infections with empiric vitamin D. There was no significant effect on select outcomes in healthy adults aged 19 to 74 years with variable certainty of evidence. There was a very small reduction in mortality among adults older than 75 years with high certainty of evidence. In pregnant women, low-certainty evidence suggested possible benefit on various maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes. In adults with prediabetes, moderate certainty of evidence suggested reduction in the rate of progression to diabetes. Administration of high-dose intermittent vitamin D may increase falls, compared to lower-dose daily dosing. We did not identify trials on the benefits and harms of screening with serum 25(OH)D. The evidence summarized in this systematic review addresses the benefits and harms of vitamin D for the prevention of disease. The guideline panel considered additional information about individuals' and providers' values and preferences and other important decisional and contextual factors to develop clinical recommendations.

Navigating Complexities: Vitamin D, Skin Pigmentation, and Race.

Vitamin D plays a critical role in many physiological functions, including calcium metabolism and musculoskeletal health. This commentary aims to explore the intricate relationships among skin complexion, race, and 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) levels, focusing on challenges the Endocrine Society encountered during clinical practice guideline development. Given that increased melanin content reduces 25(OH)D production in the skin in response to UV light, the guideline development panel addressed the potential role for 25(OH)D screening in individuals with dark skin complexion. The panel discovered that no randomized clinical trials have directly assessed vitamin D related patient-important outcomes based on participants' skin pigmentation, although race and ethnicity often served as presumed proxies for skin pigmentation in the literature. In their deliberations, guideline panel members and selected Endocrine Society leaders underscored the critical need to distinguish between skin pigmentation as a biological variable and race and ethnicity as socially determined constructs. This differentiation is vital to maximize scientific rigor and, thus, the validity of resulting recommendations. Lessons learned from the guideline development process emphasize the necessity of clarity when incorporating race and ethnicity into clinical guidelines. Such clarity is an essential step toward improving health outcomes and ensuring equitable healthcare practices.

Applying the WHO-INTEGRATE evidence-to-decision framework in the development of WHO guidelines on parenting interventions: step-by-step process and lessons learnt

BackgroundDevelopment of guidelines for public health, health system, and health policy interventions demands complex systems thinking to understand direct and indirect effects of interventions within dynamic systems. The WHO-INTEGRATE framework, an evidence-to-decision framework rooted in the norms and values of the World Health Organization (WHO), provides a structured method to assess complexities in guidelines systematically, such as the balance of an intervention’s health benefits and harms and their human rights and socio-cultural acceptability. This paper provides a worked example of the application of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework in developing the WHO guidelines on parenting interventions to prevent child maltreatment, and shares reflective insights regarding the value added, challenges encountered, and lessons learnt.MethodsThe methodological approach comprised describing the intended step-by-step application of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework and gaining reflective insights from introspective sessions within the core team guiding the development of the WHO guidelines on parenting interventions and a methodological workshop.ResultsThe WHO-INTEGRATE framework was used throughout the guideline development process. It facilitated reflective deliberation across a broad range of decision criteria and system-level aspects in the following steps: (1) scoping the guideline and defining stakeholder engagement, (2) prioritising WHO-INTEGRATE sub-criteria and guideline outcomes, (3) using research evidence to inform WHO-INTEGRATE criteria, and (4) developing and presenting recommendations informed by WHO-INTEGRATE criteria. Despite the value added, challenges, such as substantial time investment required, broad scope of prioritised sub-criteria, integration across diverse criteria, and sources of evidence and translation of insights into concise formats, were encountered.ConclusionsApplication of the WHO-INTEGRATE framework was crucial in the integration of effectiveness evidence with insights into implementation and broader implications of parenting interventions, extending beyond health benefits and harms considerations and fostering a whole-of-society-perspective. The evidence reviews for prioritised WHO-INTEGRATE sub-criteria were instrumental in guiding guideline development group discussions, informing recommendations and clarifying uncertainties. This experience offers important lessons for future guideline panels and guideline methodologists using the WHO-INTEGRATE framework.