Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Transparent development of the WHO rapid advice guidelines

  • Holger J. Schünemann
  • , Suzanne R. Hill
  • , Meetali Kakad
  • , Gunn E. Vist
  • , Richard Bellamy
  • , Lauren Stockman
  • , Torbjørn Fosen Wisløff
  • , Chris Del Del Mar
  • , Frederick Hayden
  • , Timothy M. Uyeki
  • , Jeremy Farrar
  • , Yazdan Yazdanpanah
  • , Howard Zucker
  • , John Beigel
  • , Tawee Chotpitayasunondh
  • , Tinh Hien Tran
  • , Bülent Özbay
  • , Norio Sugaya
  • , Andrew D. Oxman
  • World Health Organization
  • Norwegian Institute of Public Health
  • South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Bond University
  • University of Virginia
  • University of Oxford
  • Centre Hospitalier de Tourcoing
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Thailand Ministry of Public Health
  • University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Yuzuncu Yil University
  • Keio University

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

125 Scopus citations

Abstract

Emerging health problems require rapid advice. We describe the development and pilot testing of a systematic, transparent approach used by the World Health Organization (WHO) to develop rapid advice guidelines in response to requests from member states confronted with uncertainty about the pharmacological management of avian influenza A (H5N1) virus infection. We first searched for systematic reviews of randomized trials of treatment and prevention of seasonal influenza and for non-trial evidence on H5N1 infection, including case reports and animal and in vitro studies. A panel of clinical experts, clinicians with experience in treating patients with H5N1, influenza researchers, and methodologists was convened for a two-day meeting. Panel members reviewed the evidence prior to the meeting and agreed on the process. It took one month to put together a team to prepare the evidence profiles (i.e., summaries of the evidence on important clinical and policy questions), and it took the team only five weeks to prepare and revise the evidence profiles and to prepare draft guidelines prior to the panel meeting. A draft manuscript for publication was prepared within 10 days following the panel meeting. Strengths of the process include its transparency and the short amount of time used to prepare these WHO guidelines. The process could be improved by shortening the time required to commission evidence profiles. Further development is needed to facilitate stakeholder involvement, and evaluate and ensure the guideline's usefulness.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)786-793
Number of pages8
JournalPLOS Medicine
Volume4
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2007

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Transparent development of the WHO rapid advice guidelines'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this