Initial Working DRAFT for Stakeholder Input and Refinement


Problem to be solved

There is no quick, easy, holistic, comprehensive view across the many different sources for clinical guidance/recommendations for a specific patient or group of patients. A holistic view of the recommendations includes the evidence, value judgments, currency, and other key dimensions related to the topic-specific recommendations individually and collectively. There isn't a current or easy way to determine differences between recommendations or when recommendations or evidence underlying them changes. Another challenge is the identification of important gaps in relevant topics or subtopics.

What does solving the problem look like - e.g., what new is needed? (future vision)

Tool Users/Use Cases

Infrastructure needed to produce tools/solve problem

Other enablers needed to solve problem

Steps to address needed infrastructure / enablers  - Who does what?

How tool(s) fit in Patient Journey

Ecosystem Cycle Step(s) where tool is applicable


Use Case Table for Recommendation Summary Browser

Tool for this SheetUsersKey FunctionOverall Goalschallenge/problemuser story 1


Recommendation Summary BrowserPatient, Clinician, Systematic reviewer, Guideline developer, CDS developerCreate a summary of relevant recommendations for a clinical situation including common subgroups (e.g. hospitalized vs. outpatient)for a clinical condition: 1) what are the recommended management approaches - and risks, costs and benefits of each - for specific patient groups; how should this management approach be implemented (clinical/implementation considerations - optimizing benefits/minimizing risks)?




Use Case IDUser Personashort namegoals/objectiveschallenge/problemuser story 1user story 2user story 3submitter
R1PatientFind the recommendation for me and the supporting evidence1. Find the specific recommendation for me.
2. Understand what recommendation would maximize benefit and minimize harm.
3. Show the supporting evidence specific to the recommendation.
4. Make an easily understandable form of the linked evidence easily accessible.
1. Evidence not easily accessible to patient and caregivers
2. Evidence not easily linked to a specific recommendation
3. Evidence not easily understandable
For my condition I want to know what is recommended for me.For a recommended treatment (e.g. a specific recommendation for an anticoagulant that applies to treatment for me) I want to know the associated benefits and harms and be able to share this evidence with my doctor.For a recommended treatment (e.g. a specific recommendation for an anticoagulant that applies to treatment for me) I want to know what will reduce my chance of bleeding and my chance of stroke.Janice Tufte
R2ClinicianFind the recommendation for a patient group and a way to see if multiple recommendations are consistent.View recommendations with:
a. dates of currency.
b. signal highlighting inconsistencies.
c. markers for strength of recommendation and certainty of evidence within and across guidelines.
D. supporting evidence
Recommendations from different authoritative sources may disagree or be incompatible.
Recommendations may be "outdated" if they are derived at different times.
For a specific subpopulation (e.g. COVID-19 in critical care vs. in hospital vs. outpatient) I would like a quick summary of recommendations from authoritative sources.

Surbhi Shah
R3Systematic ReviewerQuickly identify differences in recommendations with related factors.
Systematic review priorities may not align with priorities for active clinical questions.
Difficult to know when guidelines disagree.
With limited resources to prioritize work for systematic review development we would like to identify the issues where unanswered questions lead to weak or conflicting recommendations for care.Link to supporting evidence is important to allow independent assessment of quality of evidenceIdentify the priority questions for systematic reivew development. Identify recommendations limited by controversy or insufficient evidence.Mary Butler
R4Guideline developerFind the recommendations and basis from others that match my recommendation in development.1. Identify recommendations from other guidelines with "close enough" match to the recommendation in development.
2. Understand the basis behind recommendations (avoid repeat work)
Hard to find recommendations from other guidelines at the level of specificity to match my recommendation (population specificity and intervention specificity)I want to know what other guideline developers are recommending and what evidence they have gathered and what methodologies they used.Provide feedback loop to recommendation creator (from any other user/user persona).
Sandy Lewis
R5CDS developer/ implementerKnow when changes in recommendations should trigger evaluation for changing my CDS artifactMatch recommendations to CDS artifacts. Recognize when time of recommendation change is after time of evaluation for CDS artifact.Update signal for a guideline is NOT specific enough to know if it relates to my CDS artifactFor the CDS artifacts I have for specific decisions I would like a quick summary of recommendations and notice of times of publication/change to know when to reconsider my CDS artifacts.Represent regulatory changes and warnings (e.g. FDA notices) as "recommendation modifiers" to coordinate with the Recommendation Summary Browser use.
Maria Michaels
R6Guideline disseminatorShow my recommendation in Recommendation Summary BrowserBreadth of dissemination
Ease of dissemination
Hard to reach the right audience with the specific messageI would like to represent my guideline content in the Recommendation Summary Browser.I would like access to user data to learn the breadth of dissemination by user types for my recommendation.