Living with Long COVID: Implementing a living approach to the NICE guideline on managing the long-term effects of COVID-19
Sharp, S.; Boyce, S.; Karpusheff, J.; Glen, F.
Show abstract
ObjectivesThe aim of this paper is to describe the development, implementation and evaluation of a flexible living approach to maintaining NICEs long-term effects of COVID-19 (LTE) guideline and monitoring the uncertain evidence base of this condition. Study Design and SettingThe NICE COVID-19 team reviewed its practical experiences of establishing a living approach to developing and maintaining the LTE guideline, including initial development, maintenance and eventual transition to a lower intensity model. The methods and processes were described narratively over the first 2 years of the guidelines lifespan. This was combined with quantitative data on emerging and cumulative evidence over the period to chart the evidence landscape. ResultsFollowing publication, the initial timepoint-based update process evolved into a flexible living approach with remote topic expert engagement. Experts engaged with the new process with a 64% response rate to the online surveys. Emerging evidence increased rapidly following publication [11,405 studies assessed in 2021 and 13,181 in 2022] and was captured by continuous surveillance. There were no urgent triggers for updating from the studies identified in 2022 via the living approach, saving considerable resources over the timepoint based approach which would commit resources to planning and convening expert panel meetings. A total of 184 studies with a potential future impact were summarised to capture the cumulative evidence base. Experts highlighted ongoing research and implementation issues which have further informed surveillance of the guideline. After a sustained period without triggers for updating, the living approach was restricted to the highest priority areas with surveillance of ongoing studies. ConclusionThis paper illustrates a flexible living approach taken to a novel condition with an evolving evidence landscape. Currency of some living guidelines can be maintained without the need for frequent updating. Highlights: What is new?O_LIIn an unpredictable pandemic context, novel conditions with uncertain aetiology, diagnosis, management and prognosis demand a flexible living approach to surveillance of initial recommendations, even where triggers for updating remain infrequent. C_LIO_LIMonitoring cumulative evidence with potential future impact is important for high priority areas lacking a strong evidence base. C_LIO_LIIn guidelines with previous scheduled updates, transition to a more reactive trigger-based approach can be both more efficient and productive, while maintaining currency of recommendations through continuous surveillance. C_LIO_LIDetermining when to transition between living and standard approaches to maintaining a guideline is dependent on multiple factors, including intelligence from the health and social care system, ongoing research and government policy. C_LI Use of NICE COVID-19 content internationallyOur COVID-19 rapid guidelines and evidence summaries are exempt from our overseas reuse application, licence and fee. This means you can: O_LIadopt the guidelines for your own healthcare setting C_LIO_LIadapt the guidelines by combining them with your own local content C_LIO_LItranslate the resultant outputs. C_LI When using content from our COVID-19 rapid guidelines and evidence summaries you must: O_LImake all your outputs reusing NICE content freely available to others C_LIO_LIacknowledge the use of NICE content, and link to the source content on our website C_LIO_LIonly use the NICE logo if the original NICE guidance publication is used in its entirety without including additional content C_LIO_LItell us how our content has been used by emailing reuseofcontent@nice.org.uk, to support the evaluation and development of our guidance. C_LI We cannot accept responsibility or liability for the use of our content in third party outputs. Further information on reuse of content is available on the NICE website.
Matching journals
The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and validation of an algorithm to estimate the risk of severe complications of COVID-19 to prioritise vaccination 92%
- What is the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers? An audit study 92%
- Identifying markers of health-seeking behaviour and healthcare access in UK electronic health records 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Knowledge mobilisation of rapid evidence reviews to inform health and social care policy and practice in a public health emergency: appraisal of the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre processes and impact, 2021-23 95%
- STIMULATE-ICP-Delphi (Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways Delphi): Study Protocol 93%
- Wellbeing Impact Study of High-Speed 2 (WISH2): Protocol for a mixed-methods examination of the impact of major transport infrastructure development on mental health and wellbeing 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- OpenSAFELY NHS Service Restoration Observatory 1: describing trends and variation in primary care clinical activity for 23.3 million patients in England during the first wave of COVID-19 93%
- Targeted encouragement of GP consultations for possible cancer symptoms: randomised controlled trial 92%
- Implementation of predictive risk stratification to reduce emergency admissions to hospital: experiences of general practitioners and practice managers 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Understanding the clinical characteristics and timeliness of diagnosis for patients diagnosed with Long COVID: A retrospective observational cohort study from North West London 91%
- Challenges of visibility and inclusion in Long COVID: a population-based interview study 91%
- Understanding Covid-19 misinformation and vaccine hesitancy in context: Findings from a qualitative study involving citizens in Bradford, UK 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Vaccine Confidence and Hesitancy at the start of COVID-19 vaccine deployment in the UK: An embedded mixed-methods study 89%
- Is my cough a cold or covid? A qualitative study of COVID-19 symptom recognition and attitudes towards testing in the UK 88%
- Applying machine-learning to rapidly analyse large qualitative text datasets to inform the COVID-19 pandemic response: Comparing human and machine-assisted topic analysis techniques 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.