Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Gastroenterology 1/2015

01-01-2015 | Special Article

JSGE Clinical Practice Guidelines 2014: standards, methods, and process of developing the guidelines

Authors: Masahiro Yoshida, Yoshikazu Kinoshita, Mamoru Watanabe, Kentaro Sugano

Published in: Journal of Gastroenterology | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Excerpt

The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology (JSGE) had already published its guidelines on six diseases, namely, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), peptic ulcer disease, liver cirrhosis, Crohn’s disease, gallstone disease, and chronic pancreatitis, in Japanese, and distributed them, together with their sister versions for laypeople, to its members. These guidelines are sold in bookstores, widely used even by people who are not JSGE members, and the contents are often cited in other publications. Considering the need and importance of having proper guidelines on the so-called common diseases, JSGE conducted a questionnaire survey on JSGE councilors to collect their views on priority diseases for which additional guidelines should be developed, and decided to prepare additional guidelines for functional gastrointestinal disorder, colorectal polyp, and NAFLD/NASH. In the subsequent process of developing the guidelines, it was further decided that two separate guidelines, one for functional dyspepsia (FD) and the other for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), should be developed for functional gastrointestinal disorders. Therefore, the second series of JSGE guidelines (JSGE Clinical Practice Guidelines 2014; Japanese version) was published, covering a total of four diseases. …
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Fukui T, Yamaguchi N, Morizane T, Yoshida M, Kojimahara N, editors. MINDS handbook for clinical practice guideline development 2014. Tokyo: Igaku-shoin; 2014. Fukui T, Yamaguchi N, Morizane T, Yoshida M, Kojimahara N, editors. MINDS handbook for clinical practice guideline development 2014. Tokyo: Igaku-shoin; 2014.
2.
go back to reference Aihara M, Mihara H, Murayama T, Aihara T, Fukuda S. GRADE System for clinical practice guideline—therapeutic intervention. Hirosaki: Toppan-media; 2010. Aihara M, Mihara H, Murayama T, Aihara T, Fukuda S. GRADE System for clinical practice guideline—therapeutic intervention. Hirosaki: Toppan-media; 2010.
3.
go back to reference The GRADE* working group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328:1490–4 (printed, abridged version).CrossRef The GRADE* working group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328:1490–4 (printed, abridged version).CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, GRADE Working Group, et al. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:924–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, GRADE Working Group, et al. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:924–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, GRADE Working Group, et al. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations: what is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ. 2008;336:995–8.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, GRADE Working Group, et al. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations: what is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ. 2008;336:995–8.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, GRADE Working Group, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ. 2008;336:1106–10.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, GRADE Working Group, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ. 2008;336:1106–10.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, GRADE working group, et al. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations: incorporating considerations of resources use into grading recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:1170–3.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, GRADE working group, et al. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations: incorporating considerations of resources use into grading recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:1170–3.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, GRADE Working Group, et al. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations: going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:1049–51.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, GRADE Working Group, et al. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations: going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:1049–51.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Dellinger P, GRADE working group, et al. Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive. BMJ. 2008;337:a744.PubMedCrossRef Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Dellinger P, GRADE working group, et al. Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive. BMJ. 2008;337:a744.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl E, et al. GRADE guidelines 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:383–94.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl E, et al. GRADE guidelines 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:383–94.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:295–400. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:295–400.
12.
go back to reference Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines 3: rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:401–6.PubMedCrossRef Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines 3: rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:401–6.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines 4: rating the quality of evidence—study limitation (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:407–15.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines 4: rating the quality of evidence—study limitation (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:407–15.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Montori V, et al. GRADE guidelines 5: rating the quality of evidence—publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1277–82.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Montori V, et al. GRADE guidelines 5: rating the quality of evidence—publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1277–82.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1283–93.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1283–93.PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, The GRADE Working Group, et al. GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1294–302.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, The GRADE Working Group, et al. GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1294–302.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, The GRADE Working Group, et al. GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence—indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1303–10.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, The GRADE Working Group, et al. GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence—indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1303–10.PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Sultan S, The GRADE Working Group, et al. GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1311–6.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Sultan S, The GRADE Working Group, et al. GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1311–6.PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Brunetti M, Shemilt I, The GRADE Working, et al. GRADE guidelines: 10. Considering resource use and rating the quality of economic evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:140–50.PubMedCrossRef Brunetti M, Shemilt I, The GRADE Working, et al. GRADE guidelines: 10. Considering resource use and rating the quality of economic evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:140–50.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Sultan S, et al. GRADE guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for a single outcome and for all outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:151–7.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Sultan S, et al. GRADE guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for a single outcome and for all outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:151–7.PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Santesso N, et al. GRADE guidelines 12. Preparing summary of findings tables binary outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:158–72.PubMedCrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Santesso N, et al. GRADE guidelines 12. Preparing summary of findings tables binary outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:158–72.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Thorlund K, Oxman AD, Walter SD, et al. GRADE guidelines 13. Preparing summary of findings tables-continuous outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(2):173–83.PubMedCrossRef Thorlund K, Oxman AD, Walter SD, et al. GRADE guidelines 13. Preparing summary of findings tables-continuous outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(2):173–83.PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. JCE. 2013;66(2):719–25.PubMed Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. JCE. 2013;66(2):719–25.PubMed
24.
go back to reference Andrews JC, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation’s direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(7):726–35.PubMedCrossRef Andrews JC, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation’s direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(7):726–35.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
JSGE Clinical Practice Guidelines 2014: standards, methods, and process of developing the guidelines
Authors
Masahiro Yoshida
Yoshikazu Kinoshita
Mamoru Watanabe
Kentaro Sugano
Publication date
01-01-2015
Publisher
Springer Japan
Published in
Journal of Gastroenterology / Issue 1/2015
Print ISSN: 0944-1174
Electronic ISSN: 1435-5922
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-014-1016-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Journal of Gastroenterology 1/2015 Go to the issue
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.