To the Editor: In their systematic review of clinicians' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines, Farquhar et al1 found that, although healthcare providers reported high satisfaction with guidelines, a significant number also expressed concerns about their practicality, their role in cost-cutting and their potential for increasing litigation. The review, however, did not address other potentially significant concerns of clinicians regarding the perceived validity of guidelines and the influence of external agencies (such as the pharmaceutical industry) on treatment recommendations.
The full article is accessible to AMA
members and paid subscribers.
Login to MJA or subscribe now.
Correspondence:
- 1. Farquhar CM, Kofa EW, Slutsky JR. Clinicians' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review. Med J Aust 2002; 177: 502-506. <eMJA full text>
- 2. Choudhry NK, Stelfox HT, Detsky AS. Relationships between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA 2002; 287: 612-617.
- 3. Steudel WI, Schwerdtfeger K. Guidelines for guidelines. Acta Neurochir 2001; 78: 217-223.
- 4. Shaneyfelt TM, Mayo-Smith MF, Rothwangl J. Are guidelines following guidelines? The methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines in the peer-reviewed medical literature. JAMA 1999; 281: 1900-1905.
Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.