TY - JOUR
T1 - Current knowledge on the adaptation of clinical practice guidelines
T2 - a scoping review
AU - Zhu, Simin
AU - Wang, Rui
AU - Darzi, Andrea J.
AU - Zhang, Yuan
AU - Amer, Yasser Sami
AU - Torabiardakani, Kian
AU - Schuenemann, Holger J.
AU - Akl, Elie
AU - Alonso-Coello, Pablo
AU - Song, Yang
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ Group.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Background The adaptation of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is increasingly used to efficiently develop contextualised recommendations for local, regional and national settings. However, adaptation approaches lack standardisation, and their application remains unclear. Objective To identify existing literature on CPG adaptation approaches, synthesise and analyse the definitions, rationales, key steps and their applications. Methods We conducted a scoping review and identified studies through (1) database searches in MEDLINE and EMBASE (October 2024); (2) forward citation searches (January 2024); (3) manual searches; and (4) expert recommendations. We included documents describing adaptation approaches that allow reproducibility or adapted guidelines reflecting their application, without language restriction. We analysed data using descriptive and content analysis, with visualisations using Tableau. Results We identified 49 adaptation approaches (2000–2024) and 151 applications (2007–2024). 28 approaches originated from high-income countries (57.1%), primarily aimed at improving guideline development efficiency. We categorised these approaches into methodological frameworks (n=16, 32.7%), medical association frameworks (n=7, 14.3%), organisational handbooks (n=12, 24.5%), national or regional approaches (n=13, 26.5%) and one topic-specific methodology. From the key adaptation steps of the identified approaches, we found that ‘judging quality of evidence’ and ‘establishing guideline group processes’ were the least addressed. Approximately 20% of applications modified the original approaches during the adaptation process. ADAPTE (n=50, 33.1%) and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE)-ADOLOPMENT (n=41, 27.2%) are the most commonly used adaptation approaches. Also, over half of the identified applications were adapted at the evidence level (n=88, 58.3%) and completed the process within 12 months (range: 2–36 months). Conclusions 49 adaptation approaches were identified, with a recent surge in interest and utilisation. Although adaptation can save time and resources, substantial variations among existing approaches and their applications remain. These findings highlight the need for comprehensive guidance to support standardisation and optimise the quality of the adaptation process.
AB - Background The adaptation of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is increasingly used to efficiently develop contextualised recommendations for local, regional and national settings. However, adaptation approaches lack standardisation, and their application remains unclear. Objective To identify existing literature on CPG adaptation approaches, synthesise and analyse the definitions, rationales, key steps and their applications. Methods We conducted a scoping review and identified studies through (1) database searches in MEDLINE and EMBASE (October 2024); (2) forward citation searches (January 2024); (3) manual searches; and (4) expert recommendations. We included documents describing adaptation approaches that allow reproducibility or adapted guidelines reflecting their application, without language restriction. We analysed data using descriptive and content analysis, with visualisations using Tableau. Results We identified 49 adaptation approaches (2000–2024) and 151 applications (2007–2024). 28 approaches originated from high-income countries (57.1%), primarily aimed at improving guideline development efficiency. We categorised these approaches into methodological frameworks (n=16, 32.7%), medical association frameworks (n=7, 14.3%), organisational handbooks (n=12, 24.5%), national or regional approaches (n=13, 26.5%) and one topic-specific methodology. From the key adaptation steps of the identified approaches, we found that ‘judging quality of evidence’ and ‘establishing guideline group processes’ were the least addressed. Approximately 20% of applications modified the original approaches during the adaptation process. ADAPTE (n=50, 33.1%) and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE)-ADOLOPMENT (n=41, 27.2%) are the most commonly used adaptation approaches. Also, over half of the identified applications were adapted at the evidence level (n=88, 58.3%) and completed the process within 12 months (range: 2–36 months). Conclusions 49 adaptation approaches were identified, with a recent surge in interest and utilisation. Although adaptation can save time and resources, substantial variations among existing approaches and their applications remain. These findings highlight the need for comprehensive guidance to support standardisation and optimise the quality of the adaptation process.
KW - Evidence-Based Practice
KW - Health Services Research
KW - PUBLIC HEALTH
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105025541312
U2 - 10.1136/bmjebm-2025-113925
DO - 10.1136/bmjebm-2025-113925
M3 - Review article
C2 - 41390171
AN - SCOPUS:105025541312
SN - 2515-446X
JO - BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
JF - BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
ER -