Clinical imaging guidelines part 1: a proposal for uniform methodology.

Inappropriate imaging can lead to unnecessary medical radiologic exposures and cost and may not answer the clinical question. Imaging referral guidelines inform the justification of radiologic procedures and facilitate the choice of the best test first, but their acceptance by referrers, use, and value may be limited by shortcomings in the methodology of development. Focusing on common, essential elements of methodology will help guideline developers. In 2012 and 2013, the International Atomic Energy Agency hosted Technical Meetings on Radiation Protection of Patients Through the Development of Appropriateness Criteria in Diagnostic Imaging. Participants identified and agreed on issues concerning development of imaging referral guidelines. Items based on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument were amended with additional items including development and consensus group composition. Consensus was sought on 28 items, 18 of which were agreed should be uniform, and 10 should allow for regional differences. Further work is required to encourage, provide, and identify higher quality evidence and to agree on a grading system for recommendations. Many key areas are common to guideline developers globally, opening the way for international collaboration to help demystify, simplify, and justify.

Clinical imaging guidelines part 4: challenges in identifying, engaging and collaborating with stakeholders.

The effective development and use of clinical imaging guidelines requires an understanding of who the stakeholders are, what their interests in the process are, and what roles they should play. If the appropriate stakeholders are not engaged in the right roles, it is unlikely that clinical imaging guidelines will be successfully developed, relied on, and actually used. Some stakeholders are obvious: for the development of clinical imaging guidelines, both imagers and those who request examinations, such as general practitioners, internists, and medical specialists, must be involved. To gain acceptance, other relevant groups are stakeholders, including medical societies, other health care professionals, insurers, health IT experts and vendors, and patients. The role of stakeholders must be dictated by their specific interest. For some, involvement in the creation of guidelines is the right role. For others, such as regulators or insurers, reviews or invitations to comment are required, and for others, such as medical educators, it is probably sufficient to provide information and create awareness. Only through a careful consideration of who the stakeholders are and what are their interests are the successful development, acceptance, and use of clinical imaging guidelines likely to occur. Future efforts must focus on collaboration, particularly among groups that create clinical imaging guidelines and those that can support their use, and on regulatory roles and mandates.