Skip to main content

Table 3 Risk Assessment for the Integration of Quality Assurance and Guideline Development

From: Bringing two worlds closer together: a critical analysis of an integrated approach to guideline development and quality assurance schemes

Item Risk (/25)
Group process and function for joint guideline/QA participants. 12.4
Evaluating whether accreditation based on performance measures improves patient-important outcomes. 11.8
Determining the unintended consequences of quality indicators. 11.7
Piloting quality indicators within the context of a joint guideline/QA group. 11.3
Achieving appropriate multi-stakeholder engagement for a joint guideline/QA group. 11.0
Identifying valid surrogate quality indicators that are related to patient-important outcomes. 11.0
How to consider performance measures that do not come from a specific recommendation. 10.9
Determining what the starting point is for QI development (e.g. risk that recommendations are leading). 10.9
Determining how to integrate quality indicators and evidence-to-decision frameworks. 10.4
Determining how subgroups will inform QI development in the context of a joint guideline/QA group. 9.8
Selecting the right number of QIs (not too many or few). 9.2
Distinguishing/prioritising between individual/patient and population-oriented quality indicators. 8.6
Considering the use of modelling evidence in a joint guideline/QA group. 8.6
Management of conflicts of interest relating to guideline and quality assurance development. 8.4
Conducting a prioritisation exercise for quality indicators. 8.4
Developing consensus on the criteria that should be included as monitoring and evaluation considerations in an EtD. 7.1
Developing criteria relating to when to ‘retire’ a quality indicator. 6.6
\