NDT Advance Access published online on May 9, 2008
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, doi:10.1093/ndt/gfn238
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author [2008]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
European best practice quo vadis? From European best practice guidelines (EBPG) to European renal best practice (ERBP)
1 Unità Operativa di Nefrologia, Dialisi e Trapianto, Ospedali Riuniti e CNR-IBIM, Reggio Cal 89125, Italy 2 Département Médico-Chirurgical de Néphrologie, Dialyse et Transplantation, Hôpital Erasme, Brussels, Belgium 3 Servicio de Metabolismo Oseo y Mineral / Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias, Oviedo, Spain 4 Département de Pédiatrie et INSERM U820, Hôpital Edouard-Herriot & Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France 5 Nephrology Dialysis and Transplantation, C. I. Parhon University Hospital, University of Medicine Gr. T. Popa, Iasi, Romania 6 Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Nuremberg, Germany 7 Département de Néphrologie, Hôpital Edouard-Herriot, Lyon, France 8 Division of Renal Medicine, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institutet 9 Department of Renal Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden 10 Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK 11 Department of Renal Medicine, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK 12 Department of Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, "A. Manzoni" Hospital, Lecco, Italy 13 Department of Nephrology, University Clinical Center, Skopje, Macedonia 14 Renal Unit, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK 15 Nephrology Section, University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium 16 Division of Nephrology, University Hospital, Würzburg, Germany
Correspondence and offprint requests to: C. Zoccali, Unità Operativa di Nefrologia, Dialisi e Trapianto, Ospedali Riuniti e CNR-IBIM, Reggio Cal 89125, Italy. Tel: +39-0965-397010; Fax: +39-0965-397000; E-mail: carmine.zoccali@tin.it
Keywords: ERA-EDTA; Guidelines; Nephrology; position statements
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
 |
Summary |
|---|
Although medical guidelines generally are graded according to their evidence level, low evidence ‘judgement’ are generally perceived as much as absolute truth by the medical community as high evidence ‘guidelines’ are. Being aware of this bias, a workgroup appointed by the European Renal Association–European Dialysis and Transplantation Association (ERA-EDTA), the members of which are the authors of the current publication, decided that European nephrology guidelines issued by the Association should be published only as ‘guidelines’ in the case of high-level evidence; otherwise they should be named ‘recommendations’ or ‘position statements’ and be published in a different format. Acknowledging that in nephrology, high levels of evidence are often lacking, it was also decided to rename the responsible body from European Best Practice Guidelines (EBPG) to European Renal Best Practice (ERBP). The present publication reviews the arguments based on which this decision was taken.
|
Guidelines and Scientific Societies |
|---|
Over the past two decades clinical guidelines (CPG)
The quality of recommendations in clinical nephrology guidelines
|
The problem of recommendation framing and the risk of recommendation drifting |
|---|
Guideline funding.
Strength of evidence.
|
A remedy to the drifting of recommendations: evidence bordering |
|---|
|
Conclusion |
|---|
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?