An Approach to Diversifying the Selection of a Guideline Panel-The Process Utilized for the Updated Adult Critical Care Ultrasound Guidelines.
Journal
Critical care medicine
ISSN: 1530-0293
Titre abrégé: Crit Care Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0355501
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Apr 2024
08 Apr 2024
Historique:
medline:
8
4
2024
pubmed:
8
4
2024
entrez:
8
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Clinical practice guidelines are essential for promoting evidence-based healthcare. While diversification of panel members can reduce disparities in care, processes for panel selection lack transparency. We aim to share our approach in forming a diverse expert panel for the updated Adult Critical Care Ultrasound Guidelines. This process evaluation aims to understand whether the implementation of a transparent and intentional approach to guideline panel selection would result in the creation of a diverse expert guideline panel. This study was conducted in the setting of creating a guideline panel for the updated Adult Critical Care Ultrasound Guidelines. Understanding that family/patient advocacy in guideline creations can promote the impact of a clinical practice guideline, patient representation on the expert panel was prioritized. Interventions included creation of a clear definition of expertise, an open invitation to the Society of Critical Care Medicine membership to apply for the panel, additional panel nomination by guideline leadership, voluntary disclosure of pre-identified diversity criteria by potential candidates, and independent review of applications including diversity criteria. This resulted in an overall score per candidate per reviewer and an open forum for discussion and final consensus. The variables of diversity were collected and analyzed after panel selection. These were compared with historical data on panel composition. The final guideline panel comprised of 33 panelists from six countries: 45% women and 79% historically excluded people and groups. The panel has representation from nonphysician professionals and patients advocates. Of the healthcare professionals, there is representation from early, mid, and late career stages. Our intentional and transparent approach resulted in a panel with improved gender parity and robust diversity along ethnic, racial, and professional lines. We hope it can serve as a starting point as we strive to become a more inclusive and diverse discipline that creates globally representative guidelines.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38587423
doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006290
pii: 00003246-990000000-00323
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Dr. Reuter-Rice’s institution received funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH); she received funding from textbook royalties and consultant fees; and she received support for article research from the NIH. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.
Références
Welch VA, Akl EA, Guyatt G, et al.: GRADE equity guidelines 1: Considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: Introduction and rationale. J Clin Epidemiol 2017; 90:59–67
Persaud N, Ally M, Woods H, et al.: Racialised people in clinical guideline panels. Lancet 2022; 399:139–140
Wallace DJ, Shutter L, Jonassaint N: Intentional inclusion, diversity, and transparent reporting in critical care research. Crit Care Med 2021; 49:1361–1362
Díaz-Gómez JL, Mayo PH, Koenig SJ: Point-of-care ultrasonography. N Engl J Med 2021; 385:1593–1602
Ogunyemi D: Unique Populations. Available at: https://www.aamc.org/professional-development/affinity-groups/gfa/unique-populations. Accessed January 10, 2024
Mehta S, Burns KEA, Machado FR, et al.: Gender parity in critical care medicine. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2017; 196:425–429
Pinho-Gomes AC, Vassallo A, Thompson K, et al.: Representation of women among editors in chief of leading medical journals. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4:e2123026
Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, et al.: Clinical guidelines: Potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ 1999; 318:527–530
Chary S, Amrein K, Soeteman DI, et al.: Gender disparity in critical care publications: A novel female first author index. Ann Intensive Care 2021; 11:103
Carcel C, Woodward M: Gender diversity of clinical practice guideline panels in Australia: Important opportunities for progress. Med J Aust 2023; 218:73–74
Campbell KM: The diversity efforts disparity in academic medicine. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021; 18:4529
Llorens A, Tzovara A, Bellier L, et al.: Gender bias in academia: A lifetime problem that needs solutions. Neuron 2021; 109:2047–2074
Shalit A, Vallely L, Nguyen R, et al.: The representation of women on Australian clinical practice guideline panels, 2010–2020. Med J Aust 2023; 218:84–88
Jack L: Complete republication: Recent updates to CSE recommendations for promoting integrity in scientific journal publications: 7 ways to integrate diversity, equity, and inclusion into scholarly publishing. Prev Chronic Dis 2023; 20:E17