Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Developing guideline recommendations about tests: educational examples of test-management pathways
  1. Mariska Tuut1,2,
  2. Jochen Cals1,
  3. Jesse Jansen1,
  4. Jako S Burgers1,3
  1. 1Maastricht University Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  2. 2PROVA, Varsseveld, The Netherlands
  3. 3Dutch College of General Practitioners, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Dr Mariska Tuut; mariska.tuut{at}maastrichtuniversity.nl

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Introduction

Recommendations about healthcare related testing in guidelines are common. Tests can be used for several purposes: screening, surveillance, risk classification, diagnosis, staging, treatment triage, determination of prognosis and monitoring/follow-up.1 The development of testing recommendations in guidelines is challenging, especially because the benefit of a test not only depends on test characteristics, such as sensitivity and specificity, but also on population characteristics and test consequences, such as management.2–4 Furthermore, the role of a new test in comparison to the existing testing scenario should be defined, since this influences the interpretation of the new test’s value. The following roles of new tests have been identified in the literature: triage, replacement, add-on, and parallel/combined.5

As with treatment, testing can have negative consequences, including physical impairment, psychological distress, disease labelling, and costs.6 There is limited evidence on harms of testing, and healthcare professionals often overestimate its benefits while underestimating its harms.7 This is also true for patients' expectations of testing.8 Additionally, testing occasionally yields unexpected and coincidental findings, which may result in additional testing and treatment.

There is a lack of transparency in processing the evidence and considerations that support testing recommendations in guidelines.9 To facilitate the development of test recommendations, we determined the minimum required knowledge for guideline panel members involved, supplementing the competency-based framework available for guideline development.10 11 The concept of the test-management pathway (figure 1) appeared key to understand.

Figure 1

Test-management pathway concept.

During our developmental study, the need for practical examples of test-management pathways became apparent.10 In our subsequent teach-the-teacher workshop at the 2023 Guideline International Network conference,12 participants requested additional elaboration of pathways for different test outcomes (such as false positives and false negatives) being helpful for explaining the test-management pathway concept to guideline …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors MT: conceptualisation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, visualisation, guarantor; JC: conceptualisation, validation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; JJ: validation, writing—review and editing; JSB: conceptualisation, validation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, supervision.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.