An approach to addressing subpopulation considerations in systematic reviews: the experience of reviewers supporting the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Abstract Background Guideline developers and other users of systematic reviews need information about whether a medical or preventive intervention is likely to benefit or harm some patients more (or less) than the average in order to make clinical practice recommendations tailored to these populations. However, guidance is lacking on how to include patient subpopulation considerations into the systematic reviews upon which guidelines are often based. In this article, we describe methods developed to consistently consider the evidence for relevant subpopulations in systematic reviews conducted to support primary care clinical preventive service recommendations made by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Proposed approach Our approach is grounded in our experience conducting systematic reviews for the USPSTF and informed by a review of existing guidance on subgroup analysis and subpopulation issues. We developed and refined our approach based on feedback from the Subpopulation Workgroup of the USPSTF and pilot testing on reviews being conducted for the USPSTF. This paper provides processes and tools for incorporating evidence-based identification of important sources of potential heterogeneity of intervention effects into all phases of systematic reviews. Key components of our proposed approach include targeted literature searches and key informant interviews to identify the most important subpopulations a priori during topic scoping, a framework for assessing the credibility of subgroup analyses reported in studies, and structured investigation of sources of heterogeneity of intervention effects. Conclusions Further testing and evaluation are necessary to refine this proposed approach and demonstrate its utility to the producers and users of systematic reviews beyond the context of the USPSTF. Gaps in the evidence on important subpopulations identified by routinely applying this process in systematic reviews will also inform future research needs

Using the diffusion of innovations theory to assess socio-technical factors in planning the implementation of an electronic health record alert across multiple primary care clinics

Background: Adverse drug events (ADEs) are a leading cause of death in the United States. Patients with stage 3 and 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at particular risk because many medications are cleared by the kidneys. Alerts in the electronic health record (EHR) about drug appropriateness and dosing at the time of prescription have been shown to reduce ADEs for patients with stage 3 and 4 CKD in inpatient settings, but more research is needed about the implementation and effectiveness of such alerts in outpatient settings. Objective:  To explore factors that might inform the implementation of an electronic drug–disease alert for patients with CKD in primary care clinics, using Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory as an analytic framework. Methods: Interviews were conducted with key informants in four diverse clinics using various EHR systems. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. results Although all clinics had a current method for calculating glomerular filtration rate (GFR), clinics were heterogeneous with regard to current electronic decision support practices, quality improvement resources, and organizational culture and structure. Conclusion: Understanding variation in organizational culture and infrastructure across primary care clinics is important in planning implementation of an intervention to reduce ADEs among patients with CKD