title: World Health Organization guideline development: an evaluation.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Research in 2007 showed that World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations were largely based on expert opinion, rarely used systematic evidence-based methods, and did not follow the organization's own "Guidelines for Guidelines". In response, the WHO established a "Guidelines Review Committee" (GRC) to implement and oversee internationally recognized standards. We examined the impact of these changes on WHO guideline documents and explored senior staff's perceptions of the new procedures.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We used the AGREE II guideline appraisal tool to appraise ten GRC-approved guidelines from nine WHO departments, and ten pre-GRC guidelines matched by department and topic. We interviewed 20 senior staff across 16 departments and analyzed the transcripts using the framework approach. Average AGREE II scores for GRC-approved guidelines were higher across all six AGREE domains compared with pre-GRC guidelines. The biggest changes were noted for "Rigour of Development" (up 37.6%, from 30.7% to 68.3%) and "Editorial Independence" (up 52.7%, from 20.9% to 73.6%). Four main themes emerged from the interviews: (1) high standards were widely recognized as essential for WHO credibility, particularly with regard to conflicts of interest; (2) views were mixed on whether WHO needed a single quality assurance mechanism, with some departments purposefully bypassing the procedures; (3) staff expressed some uncertainties in applying the GRADE approach, with departmental staff concentrating on technicalities while the GRC remained concerned the underlying principles were not fully institutionalized; (4) the capacity to implement the new standards varied widely, with many departments looking to an overstretched GRC for technical support.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Since 2007, WHO guideline development methods have become more systematic and transparent. However, some departments are bypassing the procedures, and as yet neither the GRC, nor the quality assurance standards they have set, are fully embedded within the organization.
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom. sinclad@liverpool.ac.uk
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Sinclair
authors.forename: Rachel
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Isba
authors.forename: Tamara
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Kredo
authors.forename: Babalwa
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Zani
authors.forename: Helen
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: Paul
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Garner
mesh_terms: D019983:Guideline Adherence / Q000458:organization & administration*; D017408:Guidelines as Topic; D006801:Humans; D011786:Quality Control; D012107:Research Design; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014944:World Health Organization