David F. Ransohoff, Michael Pignone, Harold C. Sox
In Reply: The purpose of our Viewpoint was to describe the unique contributions of the IOM standards for developing practice guidelines and the additional steps needed to increase their usefulness for appraising the trustworthiness of practice guidelines. We contrasted them with AGREE because AGREE has been widely used and cited, and we based our comments on the 2009 AGREE II standards,1 which we did not state clearly in the Viewpoint. The 2003 AGREE2 and AGREE II1 standards are quite similar except for a new item on evaluating evidence.
© 2001-2024 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados