View Item 

Show simple item record

Critical evaluation of the scientific content in clinical practice guidelines

dc.contributor.authorAbdelsattar, Zaid M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorReames, Bradley N.en_US
dc.contributor.authorRegenbogen, Scott E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHendren, Samanthaen_US
dc.contributor.authorWong, Sandra L.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2015-03-05T18:24:45Z
dc.date.available2016-05-10T20:26:28Zen
dc.date.issued2015-03-01en_US
dc.identifier.citationAbdelsattar, Zaid M.; Reames, Bradley N.; Regenbogen, Scott E.; Hendren, Samantha; Wong, Sandra L. (2015). "Critical evaluation of the scientific content in clinical practice guidelines." Cancer 121(5): 783-789.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0008-543Xen_US
dc.identifier.issn1097-0142en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/110758
dc.publisherNational Academies Pressen_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.otherorganizationsen_US
dc.subject.otherpractice guidelinesen_US
dc.subject.otherevidence‐based medicineen_US
dc.subject.otherhealth servicesen_US
dc.subject.otherrectal neoplasmsen_US
dc.titleCritical evaluation of the scientific content in clinical practice guidelinesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPublic Healthen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelOncology and Hematologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/110758/1/cncr29124.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/cncr.29124en_US
dc.identifier.sourceCanceren_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWHO Handbook for Guideline Development. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2012.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J, et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003; 348: 2635 ‐ 2645.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGreenberg CC, Lipsitz SR, Neville B, et al. Receipt of appropriate surgical care for Medicare beneficiaries with cancer. Arch Surg. 2011; 146: 1128 ‐ 1134.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSox HC. Assessing the trustworthiness of the guideline for management of high blood pressure in adults. JAMA. 2014; 311: 472 ‐ 474.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceReames BN, Krell RW, Ponto SN, Wong SL. Critical evaluation of oncology clinical practice guidelines. J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31: 2563 ‐ 2568.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKung J, Miller RR, Mackowiak PA. Failure of clinical practice guidelines to meet institute of medicine standards: two more decades of little, if any, progress. Arch Intern Med. 2012; 172: 1628 ‐ 1633.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGraham R, Mancher M, Wolman D. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011: 1 ‐ 300.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLevit L, Balogh E, Nass S, Ganz PA. Delivering High‐Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2013.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonson JRT, Weiser MR, Buie WD, et al. Practice parameters for the management of rectal cancer (revised). Dis Colon Rectum. 2013; 56: 535 ‐ 550.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSmith AJ, Driman DK, Spithoff K, et al. Optimization of Surgical and Pathological Quality Performance in Radical Surgery for Colon and Rectal Cancer: Margins and Lymph Nodes Optimization of Surgical and Pathological Quality Performance in Radical Surgery for Colon and Rectal Cancer: Margins a. Toronto: Program in Evidence‐Based Care; 2013: 7 ‐ 14.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEarle C, Annis R, Sussman J, Haynes AE, Vafaei A. A Quality Initiative of the Program in Evidence‐based Care (PEBC), Cancer Care Ontario Follow‐up Care, Surveillance Protocol, and Secondary Prevention Measures for Survivors of Colorectal Cancer A Quality Initiative of the Program in Evidence‐based Ca. Program in Evidence‐Based Care; 2012.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChan K, Welch S, Raifu AO. PET Imaging in Colorectal Cancer. Program in Evidence‐Based Care; 2011.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWong R, Berry S, Spithoff K, et al. Preoperative or Postoperative Therapy for the Management of Patients with Stage II or III Rectal Cancer Preoperative or Postoperative Therapy for the Management of Patients with Stage II or III Rectal Cancer: Guideline Recommendations. Program in Evidence‐Based Care; 2011: 2 ‐ 4.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGlimelius B, Tiret E, Cervantes A, Arnold D. Rectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow‐up. Ann Oncol. 2013; 24 ( Suppl 6 ): vi81 ‐ vi88.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNCCN. Practice Guidelines in Oncology—Rectal Cancer. 2014.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Colorectal Cancer: The Diagnosis and Management of Colorectal Cancer. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2011.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, et al. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ. 2010; 182: E839 ‐ E842.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVan de Ven AH, Delbecq AL. The nominal group as a research instrument for exploratory health studies. Am J Public Health. 1972; 62: 337 ‐ 342.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRaine R, Sanderson C, Hutchings A, Carter S, Larkin K, Black N. An experimental study of determinants of group judgments in clinical guideline development. Lancet. 364: 429 ‐ 437.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceArriaga AF, Lancaster RT, Berry WR, et al. The better colectomy project: association of evidence‐based best‐practice adherence rates to outcomes in colorectal surgery. Ann Surg. 2009; 250: 507 ‐ 513.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBosset J‐F, Collette L, Calais G, et al. Chemotherapy with preoperative radiotherapy in rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355: 1114 ‐ 1123.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCollette L, Bosset J‐F, den Dulk M, et al. Patients with curative resection of cT3‐4 rectal cancer after preoperative radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy: does anybody benefit from adjuvant fluorouracil‐based chemotherapy? A trial of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Rad. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 4379 ‐ 4386.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMinsky BD. Adjuvant management of rectal cancer: the more we learn, the less we know. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 4339 ‐ 4340.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonson JRT, Probst CP, Wexner SD, et al. Failure of evidence‐based cancer care in the United States: the association between rectal cancer treatment, cancer center volume, and geography. Ann Surg. 2014; 260: 625 ‐ 632.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrilli R, Magrini N, Penna A, Mura G, Liberati A. Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: the need for a critical appraisal. Lancet. 2000; 355: 103 ‐ 106.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, et al. Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA. 1999; 282: 1458 ‐ 1465.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
cncr29124.pdf
Size:
210.8KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.