Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection
Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. [verfasserIn] Mettes, Dirk G. [verfasserIn] Grol, Richard P. T. M. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erschienen: |
Oxford, UK: Munksgaard International Publishers ; 2002 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Umfang: |
Online-Ressource |
|---|
| Reproduktion: |
2002 ; Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Community dentistry and oral epidemiology - Oxford [u.a.] : Blackwell, 1973, 30(2002), 4, Seite 0 |
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:30 ; year:2002 ; number:4 ; pages:0 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
NLEJ242630944 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLEJ242630944 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230505205639.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 120427s2002 xx |||||o 00| ||und c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLEJ242630944 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection |
| 264 | 1 | |a Oxford, UK |b Munksgaard International Publishers |c 2002 | |
| 300 | |a Online-Ressource | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines. | ||
| 533 | |d 2002 |f Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |7 |2002|||||||||| | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a clinical practice guidelines | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Mettes, Dirk G. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Grol, Richard P. T. M. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Plasschaert, Alphons J. M. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Verdonschot, Emiel H. |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Community dentistry and oral epidemiology |d Oxford [u.a.] : Blackwell, 1973 |g 30(2002), 4, Seite 0 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)NLEJ243927207 |w (DE-600)2027101-3 |x 1600-0528 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:30 |g year:2002 |g number:4 |g pages:0 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x |q text/html |x Verlag |z Deutschlandweit zugänglich |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-1-DJB | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NL_ARTICLE | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 30 |j 2002 |e 4 |h 0 | ||
| author_variant |
d s w j m v dswjm dswjmv d g m dg dgm r p t m g rptm rptmg |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:16000528:2002----::eeomnociiapatcgieiefretsseh |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2002 |
| publishDate |
2002 |
| allfields |
10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242630944 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. verfasserin aut Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection Oxford, UK Munksgaard International Publishers 2002 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines. 2002 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2002|||||||||| clinical practice guidelines Mettes, Dirk G. verfasserin aut Grol, Richard P. T. M. verfasserin aut Plasschaert, Alphons J. M. oth Verdonschot, Emiel H. oth In Community dentistry and oral epidemiology Oxford [u.a.] : Blackwell, 1973 30(2002), 4, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243927207 (DE-600)2027101-3 1600-0528 nnns volume:30 year:2002 number:4 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 30 2002 4 0 |
| spelling |
10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242630944 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. verfasserin aut Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection Oxford, UK Munksgaard International Publishers 2002 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines. 2002 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2002|||||||||| clinical practice guidelines Mettes, Dirk G. verfasserin aut Grol, Richard P. T. M. verfasserin aut Plasschaert, Alphons J. M. oth Verdonschot, Emiel H. oth In Community dentistry and oral epidemiology Oxford [u.a.] : Blackwell, 1973 30(2002), 4, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243927207 (DE-600)2027101-3 1600-0528 nnns volume:30 year:2002 number:4 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 30 2002 4 0 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242630944 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. verfasserin aut Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection Oxford, UK Munksgaard International Publishers 2002 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines. 2002 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2002|||||||||| clinical practice guidelines Mettes, Dirk G. verfasserin aut Grol, Richard P. T. M. verfasserin aut Plasschaert, Alphons J. M. oth Verdonschot, Emiel H. oth In Community dentistry and oral epidemiology Oxford [u.a.] : Blackwell, 1973 30(2002), 4, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243927207 (DE-600)2027101-3 1600-0528 nnns volume:30 year:2002 number:4 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 30 2002 4 0 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242630944 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. verfasserin aut Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection Oxford, UK Munksgaard International Publishers 2002 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines. 2002 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2002|||||||||| clinical practice guidelines Mettes, Dirk G. verfasserin aut Grol, Richard P. T. M. verfasserin aut Plasschaert, Alphons J. M. oth Verdonschot, Emiel H. oth In Community dentistry and oral epidemiology Oxford [u.a.] : Blackwell, 1973 30(2002), 4, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243927207 (DE-600)2027101-3 1600-0528 nnns volume:30 year:2002 number:4 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 30 2002 4 0 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x doi (DE-627)NLEJ242630944 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. verfasserin aut Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection Oxford, UK Munksgaard International Publishers 2002 Online-Ressource nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines. 2002 Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |2002|||||||||| clinical practice guidelines Mettes, Dirk G. verfasserin aut Grol, Richard P. T. M. verfasserin aut Plasschaert, Alphons J. M. oth Verdonschot, Emiel H. oth In Community dentistry and oral epidemiology Oxford [u.a.] : Blackwell, 1973 30(2002), 4, Seite 0 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ243927207 (DE-600)2027101-3 1600-0528 nnns volume:30 year:2002 number:4 pages:0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x text/html Verlag Deutschlandweit zugänglich Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 30 2002 4 0 |
| source |
In Community dentistry and oral epidemiology 30(2002), 4, Seite 0 volume:30 year:2002 number:4 pages:0 |
| sourceStr |
In Community dentistry and oral epidemiology 30(2002), 4, Seite 0 volume:30 year:2002 number:4 pages:0 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
clinical practice guidelines |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Community dentistry and oral epidemiology |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. @@aut@@ Mettes, Dirk G. @@aut@@ Grol, Richard P. T. M. @@aut@@ Plasschaert, Alphons J. M. @@oth@@ Verdonschot, Emiel H. @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2002-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
NLEJ243927207 |
| id |
NLEJ242630944 |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ242630944</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230505205639.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">120427s2002 xx |||||o 00| ||und c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ242630944</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Oxford, UK</subfield><subfield code="b">Munksgaard International Publishers</subfield><subfield code="c">2002</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2002</subfield><subfield code="f">Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005</subfield><subfield code="7">|2002||||||||||</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">clinical practice guidelines</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mettes, Dirk G.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grol, Richard P. T. M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Plasschaert, Alphons J. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Verdonschot, Emiel H.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Community dentistry and oral epidemiology</subfield><subfield code="d">Oxford [u.a.] : Blackwell, 1973</subfield><subfield code="g">30(2002), 4, Seite 0</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ243927207</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2027101-3</subfield><subfield code="x">1600-0528</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:30</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2002</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x</subfield><subfield code="q">text/html</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="z">Deutschlandweit zugänglich</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-DJB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">30</subfield><subfield code="j">2002</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| series2 |
Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005 |
| author |
Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. |
| spellingShingle |
Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. misc clinical practice guidelines Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection |
| authorStr |
Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)NLEJ243927207 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut |
| collection |
NL |
| publishPlace |
Oxford, UK |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1600-0528 |
| topic_title |
Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection clinical practice guidelines |
| publisher |
Munksgaard International Publishers |
| publisherStr |
Munksgaard International Publishers |
| topic |
misc clinical practice guidelines |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc clinical practice guidelines |
| topic_browse |
misc clinical practice guidelines |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
a j m p ajm ajmp e h v eh ehv |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Community dentistry and oral epidemiology |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
NLEJ243927207 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Community dentistry and oral epidemiology |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)NLEJ243927207 (DE-600)2027101-3 |
| title |
Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)NLEJ242630944 |
| title_full |
Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection |
| author_sort |
Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. |
| journal |
Community dentistry and oral epidemiology |
| journalStr |
Community dentistry and oral epidemiology |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2002 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
0 |
| author_browse |
Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. Mettes, Dirk G. Grol, Richard P. T. M. |
| container_volume |
30 |
| physical |
Online-Ressource |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection |
| title_auth |
Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection |
| abstract |
Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines. |
| abstractGer |
Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-DJB GBV_NL_ARTICLE |
| container_issue |
4 |
| title_short |
Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Mettes, Dirk G. Grol, Richard P. T. M. Plasschaert, Alphons J. M. Verdonschot, Emiel H. |
| author2Str |
Mettes, Dirk G. Grol, Richard P. T. M. Plasschaert, Alphons J. M. Verdonschot, Emiel H. |
| ppnlink |
NLEJ243927207 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T02:39:53.145Z |
| _version_ |
1803795660163514368 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ242630944</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230505205639.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">120427s2002 xx |||||o 00| ||und c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ242630944</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Van Der Sanden, Wil J. M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Development of clinical practice guidelines for dentists: methods for topic selection</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Oxford, UK</subfield><subfield code="b">Munksgaard International Publishers</subfield><subfield code="c">2002</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract –Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare four methods for assessing the preferences of the dental profession for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.Methods: The methods were: (1) a survey among dentists, (2) an analysis of topics discussed in dental peer groups, and (3) screening of dental journals. A fourth method was obtained from method number 3. The frequencies of the reported topics were calculated for each of the methods. For the fourth method, the number of publications per topic were plotted against the year of publication, and the slope of the linear regression line was used as an indicator. Within each of the four methods, the topics were ranked according to the frequency in which they were reported, and to the slope value. The reliability of the methods was tested by the “item-rest sum correlation”, which is the correlation of the rank positions of one method with the sum of the rank positions obtained by the remaining three methods.Results: In using all methods, a total of 1027 topics were obtained. Reclassification resulted in 34 topics. Moderate item-rest sum correlations ranging from 0.34 to 0.48 were found for all methods, indicating that the rank order of every method moderately predicts the sum of the rank orders obtained by all other methods. The topic ‘prevention of cross-infection’ had the highest overall rank position.Conclusion: It is concluded that the four applied methods appeared to provide a consistent ranking of potential topics. In view of the fact that the questionnaire method is generally applicable, this method should be preferred for assessing dentists' preferences for topics to be considered for the development of clinical practice guidelines.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">2002</subfield><subfield code="f">Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005</subfield><subfield code="7">|2002||||||||||</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">clinical practice guidelines</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mettes, Dirk G.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grol, Richard P. T. M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Plasschaert, Alphons J. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Verdonschot, Emiel H.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Community dentistry and oral epidemiology</subfield><subfield code="d">Oxford [u.a.] : Blackwell, 1973</subfield><subfield code="g">30(2002), 4, Seite 0</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ243927207</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2027101-3</subfield><subfield code="x">1600-0528</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:30</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2002</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2002.00060.x</subfield><subfield code="q">text/html</subfield><subfield code="x">Verlag</subfield><subfield code="z">Deutschlandweit zugänglich</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-DJB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">30</subfield><subfield code="j">2002</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4009876 |