ASH Clinical News August 2015_updated | Page 49

FEATURE friends.” At every level of approval, individuals are likely to be included who are unfamiliar to the chair and to each other. The goal is to create a group that is balanced, diverse, and multidisciplinary. “We want to include those in academics and practicing community hematologists, methodology experts and content experts, and even experts from other relevant fields [such as health economics],” Dr. Rajasekhar said. “Readers may trust a guideline on the basis of a strong development process, but they also pay attention to who served on the panel.” —ANITA RAJASEKHAR, MD ASH has also made efforts to include junior faculty members, women, minorities, and international experts to ensure there are diverse backgrounds and ideas represented on the panel as well. Research has supported the use of such multidisciplinary teams to create a balanced panel that can ultimately deliver clinically meaningful guidelines, according to Holger Schünemann, MD, PhD, MSc, chair of the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics at McMaster University in Ontario. Creating Credibility Another important factor in the selection process is minimizing potential conflicts of interest – financial or research-based – or any circumstance that would prevent a panelist from approaching the question or recommendation with an open mind. “There is a lot of evidence that indicates that people with potential conflicts make recommendations that are not necessarily in the best interests of those who are at the receiving end, so these conflicts of interests and considerations have started to play a very important role in eligibility for these panel positions,” Dr. Schünemann, who is also serving as the vice-chair of the VTE coordination panel, said. Guided by an ASH stand-alone policy created to help manage conflict of interest in guideline development creation, those who select the panel vet each candidate to assess any potential conflicts. “In [ASH’s] particular policy, we mandate that a majority of each guideline panel, including the chair and the vice chair, cannot have any current financial interest with companies that could be positively or negatively affected by the guidelines,” Dr. Rajasekhar said. This policy is intended to be consistent with recommendations of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) as well as the Council of Medical Specialty Societies, a membership organization that represents most U.S. medical specialty societies including ASH, according to Dr. Panepinto. “The ways guideline developers think about conflict of interests has evolved greatly. Not long ago, conflicts were managed mainly through disclosure and transparency. In 2011, IOM raised the bar by recommending limits on the participation of individuals with conflicts.” ASHClinicalNews.org However, ASH guideline panels aren’t completely free of conflict of interest by design. Members who have what’s perceived as a conflict of interest could also be those who have the most clinical or research experience in a given area – their expertise could be a valuable part of the panel. The key, Dr. Rajasekhar said, is preventing bias (not conflict of interest) from entering into the process. “It is crucial to have that scientific, clinical, methodologic, or other expertise and ensure that you are preventing bias from those conflicts,” she said. Patients can also be a valuable part of the process, as well. Experts say having patients on guideline panels can provide the team with a unique and essential perspective. “The doctors don’t receive the treatment; the patients do,” Dr. Schünemann remarked, “Patients are the individuals who can probably best consider whatever the interventions are or what the actual outcomes are that are being prevented or caused by treatment.” “The IOM recommends that patient representatives should be included in the guideline development process, at a minimum during the question formulation step,” Dr. Panepinto explained. “We are piloting involving them on our VTE guidelines.” With the support of patient advocacy organizations, including the National Blood Clot Alliance, ASH staff identified more than 100 individuals who personally experienced VTE and were interested in v