Dunja Dreesens

172 Abstract Background Patient-directed knowledge tools such as patient versions of guidelines and patient decision aids are increasingly developed to facilitate shared decision-making. In this paper, we report how consensus was reached within the Netherlands on quality criteria for development, content and governance of these tools Method A 12-month development and consensus study. The consortium worked on four work packages: 1/ reviewing existing criteria; 2/ drafting the quality criteria; 3/ safe-guarding the acceptability and feasibility of the draft criteria by participatory research in ongoing tool development projects; and 4/ gaining formal support from national stakeholders on the quality criteria. Results We reached consensus on an 8-step guidance; describing minimal quality criteria for 1/ the team composition, 2/ setting the scope, 3/ identifying needs, 4/ the content and format, 5/ testing the draft, 6/ finalising and approval, 7/ dissemination and application, and 8/ ownership and revision. The participants of the ongoing tool development projects were positive about the quality criteria in general, but divided as to the degree of detail. Whereas some expressed a clear desire for procedural standards, others felt that it would be sufficient to provide only general directions. Despite the different views as to the degree of detail, consensus was reached in three stakeholder meetings. Discussion We successfully collaborated with all stakeholders and achieved formal support from national stakeholders on a set of minimum criteria for the development process, content and governance of patient-directed knowledge tools. Keywords patient participation, patient involvement, shared decision-making, clinical practice guidelines, quality standards, patient decision aids, patient information, patient versions of guidelines Valorisation chapter