158 Chapter 4 required for clinical guideline development, such as the performance of a systematic review or group process techniques, are outside the scope of this study. - This study focuses on the development of a clinical practice guideline in a guideline panel. Knowledge required to develop or improve guideline methods, such as improvement of GRADE methodology, is outside the scope of this study. - This study focuses on knowledge components, which might be required in different levels to develop diagnostic test recommendations. We used a modified version of Bloom’s taxonomy to distinguish between the levels of knowledge which might be required. A simple illustration of Bloom’s taxonomy is given below: Figure 2. Bloom’s taxonomy, created by the Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Compared to Bloom’s taxonomy we added one level prior to the first level (remember): ‘not necessary to know’. References 1. Norris SL, Meerpohl JJ, Akl EA, Schunemann HJ, Gartlehner G, Chen Y, et al. The skills and experience of GRADE methodologists can be assessed with a simple tool. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;79:150-8.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.07.001. 2. Sultan S, Morgan RL, Murad MH, Falck-Ytter Y, Dahm P, Schunemann HJ, et al. A Theoretical Framework and Competency-Based Approach to Training in Guideline Development. J Gen Intern Med. 2020;35(2):561-7. doi:10.1007/s11606-019-05502-9. 3. Institute of Medicine Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. In: Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, Greenfield S, Steinberg E, editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US). Copyright 2011 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.; 2011 isbn: doi:10.17226/13058. 4. Deeks JJ, Bossuyt PM. Chapter 2: Evaluating medical tests. 2023 In: Deeks JJ, Bossuyt PM, Leeflang MM, Takwoingi Y, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Version 20 (updated July 2023). Cochrane. Available from: https://training.cochrane.org/handbookdiagnostic-test-accuracy/current. 5. Norman G, Barraclough K, Dolovich L, Price D. Iterative diagnosis. BMJ. 2009;339:b3490. doi:10.1136/bmj.b3490. 6. Wulff HR. (eds.). Principes van klinisch denken en handelen; Nederlandse bewerking. Utrecht: Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema; 1980. isbn:90 313 0399 2. 7. Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Lohr KN, Mulrow CD, Teutsch SM, et al. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20(3 Suppl):21-35. doi:10.1016/s0749-3797(01)00261-6.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw