Table 2.
Comparison of the methodology of the Canadian, German, and Israeli guidelines.
| Canada | Germany | Israel | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Needs assessment | Structured consultation with 139 healthcare professionals from relevant disciplines | Structured consultation within the guideline group (50 persons building 8 working groups) | Structured consultation within the guideline group |
| Databases | EMBASE, MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO, PUBMED, and Cochrane Library | Medline, PsychINFO, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library | Medline, Cochrane Library |
| Dates of search strategy | Until July 2010 | Until December 2010 | Until April 2012 |
| Sources of evidence | Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical trials | Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of pain, fatigue, sleep problems, quality of life, and drop out for any reasons in randomised controlled trials conducted by guideline group; harms of therapies as reported in RCTs and in the literature | Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and clinical trials |
| Sources of recommendations | Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, RCTs, panel consensus, and approval by ≥80% of 35 members of the National Fibromyalgia Guidelines Advisory Panel (NFGAP) | Systematic reviews with meta-analyses conducted by guideline group; structured consensus conference* | Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and RCTs; panel consensus |
| Number of references in the guideline document | 336 | 608 | 30 |
| Classification of evidence | Oxford criteria | Oxford criteria | Oxford criteria |
| Classification of recommendations | Oxford criteria | German national guidelines | Recommendations based on strength of evidence |
| External review | One international expert Boards of both endorsing scientific societies |
Boards of scientific societies involved | Chairman of Israel Rheumatology Society |
| Publication | In press | April 13, 2012 | In press |
| Internet access | http://www.canadianpainsociety.ca/pdf/Fibromyalgia_Guidelines_2012.pdf | http://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/041-004.html | http://www.ima.org.il/Ima/FormStorage/Type7/clinical_68_fibrom.pdf |
*Strong consensus: >95% of the participants consented; consensus: 75–95% of the participants consented; majority: 50–75% of the participants consented. A minority statement and an explanatory statement were possible.
RCT: randomized controlled trial.