Current processes of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: refining evidence-based recommendation development.

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland, USA.
Annals of internal medicine (Impact Factor: 16.1). 08/2007; 147(2):117-22.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), an independent panel that has provided the gold standard for evidence-based guidelines in prevention for the past 2 decades, continuously refines its methodology. To keep up with the evolving field of evidence- based medicine and to update recommendations in a timely, efficient, and transparent manner, the USPSTF has developed new methods for evidence reviews and recommendation development. This article summarizes the most recent changes in the recommendation development process, including how the USPSTF solicits and prioritizes topics for review, updates evidence reviews and recommendations, and communicates with its audience.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) provides the Public Health Agency of Canada with ongoing and timely medical, scientifi c and public health advice relating to immunization. The Public Health Agency of Canada acknowledges that the advice and recommendations set out in this statement are based upon the best current available scientifi c knowledge and is disseminating this document for information purposes. NACI members and liaison members conduct themselves within the context of the Public Health Agency of Canada's Policy on Confl ict of Interest, including yearly declaration of potential confl ict of interest.
    Canada communicable disease report = Relevé des maladies transmissibles au Canada 01/2009; 35(1).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Screening for presymptomatic disease provides the potential for early intervention and improved outcomes. However, although this practice has potential benefits, it also has potential harms that must be considered. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is a nonfederal panel of experts convened by the Agency for Health Research and Policy to systematically review the evidence for preventive services, including disease screening, and to create evidence-based recommendations for primary care practice in the United States. As rheumatologists contemplate the potential of screening for preclinical disease, understanding the process used by the USPSTF can help guide research efforts supporting such screening. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Rheumatic Disease Clinics of North America 11/2014; 40(4). DOI:10.1016/j.rdc.2014.07.016 · 1.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Food and feed safety risk assessment uses multi-parameter models to evaluate the likelihood of adverse events associated with exposure to hazards in human health, plant health, animal health, animal welfare and the environment. Systematic review and meta-analysis are established methods for answering questions in health care, and can be implemented to minimise biases in food and feed safety risk assessment. However, no methodological frameworks exist for refining risk assessment multi-parameter models into questions suitable for systematic review, and use of meta-analysis to estimate all parameters required by a risk model may not be always feasible. This paper describes novel approaches for determining question suitability and for prioritising questions for systematic review in this area. Risk assessment questions that aim to estimate a parameter are likely to be suitable for systematic review. Such questions can be structured by their "key elements" (e.g., for intervention questions, the population(s), intervention(s), comparator(s) and outcome(s)). Prioritisation of questions to be addressed by systematic review relies on the likely impact and related uncertainty of individual parameters in the risk model. This approach to planning and prioritising systematic review seems to have useful implications for producing evidence-based food and feed safety risk assessment.
    Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 09/2015; IN PRESS UNCORRECTED PROOF. DOI:10.1080/10408398.2013.769933 · 5.55 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 16, 2014