Editor’s Picks

• Authors
  Langer G, Meerpohl JJ, Perleth M, Gartlehner G, Kaminski-Hartenthaler A, Schunemann H.

• Title
  [GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes]. [German]

• Abstract
  GRADE requires a clear specification of the relevant setting, population, intervention, and comparator. It also requiresspecification of all important outcomes - whether evidence from research studies is, or is not, available. For a particular management question, the population, intervention, and outcome should be sufficiently similar across studies so that a similar magnitude of effect is plausible. Guideline developers should specify the relative importance of the outcomes before gathering the evidence and again when evidence summaries are complete. In considering the importance of a surrogate outcome, authors should rate the importance of the patient-important outcome for which the surrogate is a substitute and subsequently rate down the quality of evidence for indirectness of outcome. Copyright Copyright 2012. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

• Authors
  Zhao D, Hu D.

• Title
  Barriers to translating EU and US CVD guidelines into practice in China.

• Abstract
  With the increasing globalization of clinical research and evidence, clinical-practice guidelines (CPGs) developed by the European Union (EU) and the USA are also becoming increasingly international. However, these CPGs can encounter barriers to their practical application. In this Perspectives article, we analyze the main obstacles to the application of EU and US CPGs for cardiovascular diseases from the unique perspective of China, and highlight some potential problems in the globalization of CPGs. Currently, China and other countries with limited independent evidence for CPG development must localize or adapt the CPGs developed by the EU, the USA, or international medical organizations, with systematic consideration of costeffectiveness and alternative strategies on the basis of the available evidence from the native populations. At the same time, comprehensive capabilities to collect and review clinical evidence to produce population-specific CPGs should be developed.

• [GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes]. Langer G, Meerpohl JJ, Perleth M, Gartlehner G, Kaminski-Hartenthaler A, Schünemann H. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 2012; 106(5):369-76.
• Barriers to translating EU and US CVD guidelines into practice in China. Zhao D, Hu D. Nat Rev Cardiol 2012;9(7):425-9.
• European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline Development Policy. Dumonceau JM, Hassan C, Riphaus A, Ponchon T. Endoscopy 2012; 44(6):626-9.
• Evidence, values, guidelines and rational decision-making. Barrett B. J Gen Intern Med 2012; 27(2):238-40.
• Evidence-based therapy according to the guideline for gastric ulcers is cost-effective in Japan. Taniyama K, Shimbo T, Iwase H, Tanaka S, Watanabe N, Uemura N. J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 2011; 62(6):627-35.
• Participation in the EUREQUO database report. Lundström M, Barry P, Henry Y, Rosen P, Stenevi U. J Cataract Refract Surg 2012; 38(8):1510.
• Thromboprophylaxis in surgical and medical patients. Bozzato S, Galli L, Ageno W. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2012; 33(2):163-75.

• Updating clinical practice recommendations: is it worthwhile and when? Lyratzopoulos G, Barnes S, Stegenga H, Peden S, Campbell B. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2012; 28(1):29-35.