title: Reporting standards for guideline-based performance measures.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) aims to promote high quality clinical guideline development and implementation. Guideline-based performance measures are a key implementation tool and are widely used internationally for quality improvement, quality assurance, and pay for performance in health care. There is, however, no international consensus on best methods for guideline-based performance measures. In order to address this issue, the G-I-N Performance Measures Working Group aimed to develop a set of consensus-based reporting standards for guideline-based performance measure development and re-evaluation.
  
  
  METHODS
  Methodology publications on guideline-based performance measures were identified from a systematic literature review and analyzed. Core criteria for the development and evaluation process of guideline-based performance measures were determined and refined into draft standards with an associated rationale and description of the evidence base. In a two-round Delphi-process, the group members appraised and approved the draft standards. After the first round, the group met to discuss comments and revised the drafts accordingly.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Twenty-one methodology publications were reviewed. The group reached strong consensus on nine reporting standards concerning: (1) selection of clinical guidelines, (2) extraction of clinical guideline recommendations, (3) description of the measure development process, (4) measure appraisal, (5) measure specification, (6) description of the intended use of the measure, (7) measure testing/validating, (8) measure review/re-evaluation, and (9) composition of the measure development panel.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  These proposed international reporting standards address core components of guideline-based performance measure development and re-evaluation. They are intended to contribute to international reporting harmonization and improvement of methods for performance measures. Further research is required regarding validity, acceptability, and practicality.
authors.affiliation: Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften-Institut für Medizinisches Wissensmanagement (AWMF-IMWI), Philipps-Universität Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch-Str.1, Marburg, 35043, Germany. nothacker@awmf.org.
authors.forename: Monika
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Nothacker
authors.affiliation: Department of General Practice and Rural Health, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
authors.forename: Tim
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Stokes
authors.affiliation: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Manchester, UK.
authors.forename: Beth
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Shaw
authors.affiliation: Heart and Stroke Foundation, Ottawa, Canada.
authors.forename: Patrice
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Lindsay
authors.affiliation: The Finnish Medical Society Duodecim, Current Care Guidelines, Helsinki, Finland.
authors.forename: Raija
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Sipilä
authors.affiliation: German Cancer Society, Berlin, Germany.
authors.forename: Markus
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Follmann
authors.affiliation: Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften-Institut für Medizinisches Wissensmanagement (AWMF-IMWI), Philipps-Universität Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch-Str.1, Marburg, 35043, Germany.
authors.forename: Ina
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Kopp
mesh_terms: D003695:Delivery of Health Care / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D011361:Professional Competence / Q000592:standards*