Volume 30, Issue 4 pp. 313-319

Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection

Wil J. M. Van Der Sanden

Wil J. M. Van Der Sanden

Department of Cariology and Endodontology, University Medical Center,

Search for more papers by this author
Dirk G. Mettes

Dirk G. Mettes

Department of Cariology and Endodontology, University Medical Center,

Search for more papers by this author
Richard P. T. M. Grol

Richard P. T. M. Grol

Centre for Quality of Care Research (WOK), University of Nijmegen, the Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author
Alphons J. M. Plasschaert

Alphons J. M. Plasschaert

Department of Cariology and Endodontology, University Medical Center,

Search for more papers by this author
Emiel H. Verdonschot

Emiel H. Verdonschot

Department of Cariology and Endodontology, University Medical Center,

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 29 July 2002
Citations: 5
Wil J. M. van der Sanden, College of Dental Sciences, University of Nijmegen, PO Box 9101, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, the Netherlands
Tel: +31 24 36 16629
Fax: +31 24 35 40265
e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.

Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.

Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.

Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.