Cited by 158Chronic Disease Management StrategiesClinical practice guidelines implementationPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes

A Framework for Crafting Clinical Practice Guidelines That Are Relevant to the Care and Management of People with Multimorbidity

Open access
Uhlig, Katrin, Leff, Bruce, Kent, David, Dy, Sydney, Brunnhuber, Klara, Burgers, Jako S., Greenfield, Sheldon, Guyatt, Gordon +8 more·2014·Journal of General Internal Medicine

Abstract

Many patients of all ages have multiple conditions, yet clinicians often lack explicit guidance on how to approach clinical decision-making for such people. Most recommendations from clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) focus on the management of single diseases, and may be harmful or impractical for patients with multimorbidity. A major barrier to the development of guidance for people with multimorbidity stems from the fact that the evidence underlying CPGs derives from studies predominantly focused on the management of a single disease. In this paper, the investigators from the Improving Guidelines for Multimorbid Patients Study Group present consensus-based recommendations for guideline developers to make guidelines more useful for the care of people with multimorbidity. In an iterative process informed by review of key literature and experience, we drafted a list of issues and possible approaches for addressing important coexisting conditions in each step of the guideline development process, with a focus on considering relevant interactions between the conditions, their treatments and their outcomes. The recommended approaches address consideration of coexisting conditions at all major steps in CPG development, from nominating and scoping the topic, commissioning the work group, refining key questions, ranking importance of outcomes, conducting systematic reviews, assessing quality of evidence and applicability, summarizing benefits and harms, to formulating recommendations and grading their strength. The list of issues and recommendations was reviewed and refined iteratively by stakeholders. This framework acknowledges the challenges faced by CPG developers who must make complex judgments in the absence of high-quality or direct evidence. These recommendations require validation through implementation, evaluation and refinement.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11606-013-2659-y

Cites

0 citation errors · 1 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Most clinical practice guidelines target specific diseases, ignoring their relevance for patients with various comorbidities.

    “In addition to the aforementioned issues with diagnostic error definitions, most clinical practice guidelines target specific diseases, ignoring their relevance for patients with various comorbidities [148,149,150].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Patient-centered care for older adults with multiple chronic conditions: a stepwise approach from the american geriatrics society: american geriatrics society expert panel on the care of older adults with multimorbidity. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012;60(10):1957-68.
  2. Tinetti ME, Bogardus ST Jr, Agostini JV. Potential pitfalls of disease- specific guidelines for patients with multiple conditions. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(27):2870-4.
  3. Van Spall HG, Toren A, Kiss A, Fowler RA. Eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials published in high-impact general medical journals: a systematic sampling review. JAMA. 2007;297(11):1233-40.
  4. Braithwaite RS, Fiellin D, Justice AC. The payoff time: a flexible framework to help clinicians decide when patients with comorbid disease are not likely to benefit from practice guidelines. Med Care. 2009;47(6):610-7.
  5. Barrett BJ, Parfrey PS. Clinical practice. Preventing nephropathy induced by contrast medium. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(4):379-86.
  6. KDIGO clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis, evaluation, preven- tion, and treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease-Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD). Kidney Int Suppl 2009(113):S1-130.
  7. MacLean S, Mulla S, Akl EA, Jankowski M, Vandvik PO, Ebrahim S, et al. Patient values and preferences in decision making for antithrombotic therapy: a systematic review: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence- Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012;141(2 Suppl):e1S-23S.
  8. Boyd CM, Vollenweider D, Puhan MA. Informing evidence-based decision- making for patients with comorbidity: availability of necessary informa- tion in clinical trials for chronic diseases. PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e41601.
  9. Greenfield S, Billimek J, Pellegrini F, Franciosi M, De Berardis G, Nicolucci A, et al. Comorbidity affects the relationship between glycemic control and cardiovascular outcomes in diabetes: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(12):854-60.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Uhlig, K., Leff, B., Kent, D., Dy, S., Brunnhuber, K., Burgers, J. S., Greenfield, S., Guyatt, G., High, K., Leipzig, R., Mulrow, C., Schmader, K., Schunemann, H., Walter, L. C., Woodcock, J., & Boyd, C. M.
Affiliations
  • Tufts University (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Tufts Medical Center (US)
  • BMJ Group (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Dutch College of General Practitioners (NL)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • San Francisco VA Medical Center (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Boyd, Cynthia M.
Venue
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Published
2014-01-18
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
670-679
ISSN
  • 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-1497
OpenAlex
W2146328920
Cited by
158
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 2
FWCI
2.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
  • John A. Hartford Foundation
  • Hartford Foundation for Public Giving
  • Atlantic Philanthropies
  • Brown University
  • Tufts Medical Center
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • Starr Foundation
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R21HS017653, R21HS018597, AHRQ R21 HS017653, AHRQ R21 HS018597-01)
  • Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K021796/1, MR/K023187/1)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007462/1)
  • Center for Innovative Medicine
  • National Institute on Aging (K23AG032910, K24AG041180, NIA K23 AG032910, P30AG028716)
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA134425)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Keywords
multimorbidity, guideline development, comorbidities, clinical decision-making, guideline applicability, evidence quality assessment, benefit-harm assessment, consensus recommendations, stakeholder engagement
MeSH terms
Congresses as Topic, Patient Care, Humans, Comorbidity, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine, Disease Management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review