110 Chapter 3 Organisation Year Country Title (original language) Englishtranslated title in case of nonEnglish language CPG Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e.V. (AWMF) [28] Ministry of Public Health (MoPH_A) [31] 2019 Qatar The diagnosis & management of asthma in adults Ministry of Public Health (MoPH_C) [33] 2019 Qatar The diagnosis & management of asthma in children National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) [29] 2020 USA Managing Asthma in Adolescents and Adults National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) [30] 2020 UK Asthma: diagnosis, monitoring and chronic asthma management Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) [32] 2019 UK British guideline on the management of asthma Supporting evidence for the recommendations Detailed information about the supporting evidence for the included recommendations is presented in table 3. Ten CPGs out of 15 considered diagnostic accuracy [20-22, 24, 26-30, 32], of which four underpinned these considerations with a systematic review of the literature and a judgement of the certainty in the evidence [21, 28-30]. Burden of the test was considered in three CPGs [24, 27, 29], and two CPGs considered the natural course of the disease [19, 32], all without systematically reviewing the literature. Three CPGs considered treatment effectiveness [19, 25, 28], of which one performed a systematic review of the literature with judgement of the certainty in the evidence [28]. Not any CPG considered the link between the test result and administration of treatment. As a consequence, there were no CPGs that considered all test consequences of the test-treatment pathway. Since no CPG systematically evaluated all steps of the test-treatment pathway, we were not able to identify a best practice, nor could we study possible relationships between clarifying factors and supporting evidence for a recommendation.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw