Understanding EGAPP
This website is archived for historical purposes and is no longer being maintained or updated.
Steps in the EGAPP Working Group Review Process
|
Topics
|
Evidence
Report |
Recommendation Statement
|
Dissemination
|
---|---|---|---|---|
EGAPP Working Group (EWG) |
|
|
|
|
EGAPP consultants and CDC-based staff |
|
|
|
|
EWG members who serve on Technical Expert Panel |
|
|
|
|
EWG who serve on the recommendation writing team |
|
|
|
|
Stakeholders and interested public |
|
|
|
|
Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs) and other review groups |
|
|
|
|
Expert and/or peer reviewers |
|
|
|
|
Industry/test developer* * invited comment on the final evidence report |
|
|
|
|
Summary: Process for identifying, prioritizing, and selecting tests and specific clinical scenarios for systematic review.
Who is involved: EGAPP Working Group (EWG) Topics Subcommittee, full EWG, CDC-based EGAPP staff, and interested public. See process diagram below for details.
Transparency: EGAPP welcomes suggestions on potential topics for review. Those submitting suggestions are
encouraged to include information on the disorder, the specific test(s), and the specific clinical
scenario(s) in which the test will be used. EGAPP Working Group members make final topic selections.
Products:
- List of topics
- Key questions and analytic framework for evidence reviews
Topic Selection Process
Summary: An evidence review involves many steps and is meant to synthesize available evidence on a particular disorder, test, and clinical scenario.
CDC commissions systematic evidence reviews using two strategies:
- Comprehensive Reviews are usually done in partnership with Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Centers (AHRQ EPCs). EPCs conduct comprehensive literature searches and evaluation, with detailed
documentation of methods and results. - Targeted and/or Rapid Reviews are conducted for topics with minimal literature to review and/or targeted questions to answer. These reviews are coordinated by CDC-based EGAPP staff in collaboration with technical contractors and expert core consultants.
Evidence reports, the products of these reviews, are detailed, systematic, objective assessments of the available scientific and
clinical evidence on a specific topic. Evidence reports are the basis for deliberations by the EGAPP Working Group as they develop
their Recommendation Statements.
Who is involved: CDC commissions the review, the EWG develops the key questions to be addressed, and the selected review team (e.g., EPC or other contracted group) conducts the review and produces a report. The review team establishes a Technical Expert Panel (TEP) to provide guidance, usually including topic experts and two to three EWG members.
Transparency: All EGAPP Working Group members, review team members, and consultants disclose potential conflicts of interest
for each topic considered. Evidence reports undergo external expert review. Reports or manuscripts published with CDC staff as authors may undergo CDC clearance.
Products:
Evidence reports posted on web sites (EGAPP or AHRQ)
Published summaries of evidence from the AHRQ EPCs or other contracted review group.
EGAPP EVIDENCE REVIEW PROCESS
Comprehensive EPC Reviews
Conducted by Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Centers
Technical Expert Panel (TEP) by EPC established to guide review
- The TEP includes topic experts and 2-3 EWG members to finalize key questions and guide the scope and content of the review.
Evidence report drafted
- Evidence reviewers solicit comments on draft evidence report from TEP, EWG, and expert reviewers selected by the EPC.
Final evidence report provided to AHRQ
- Reviewed and accepted by AHRQ
- Provided to CDC and EGAPP Working Group
- Posted on AHRQ web site and linked to from EWG website
Optional: EPC publishes summary manuscript in journal
Rapid and/or Targeted Reviews
Conducted by reviewers who may include:
- Core EGAPP consultants in with expertise in evidence-based review
- Consultants in specific topic areas (e.g., oncology)
- CDC-based technical EGAPP staff
TEP established to guide review
- The TEP includes topic experts and 2-3 EWG members to finalize key questions and guide the scope and content of the review.
Evidence report drafted
- Evidence reviewers solicit comments on draft evidence report from TEP, EWG, and expert reviewers selected by the review group.
Final evidence report provided to CDC and EWG
- Approved by EWG
- If CDC authors, cleared by CDC
- EWG provides final report to selected test developers for comment to aid in developing Recommendation Statement
- Final evidence report posted on EWG web site
- Evidence summary is prepared for submission to journal
Summary: The EGAPP Working Group (EWG) reviews the evidence report, considers contextual issues, and may consider other
sources of evidence. A draft recommendation statement is developed, peer-reviewed, and submitted for publication.
EWG Recommendation Statements are based on CDC-commissioned evidence reports, other review of evidence as needed, the quality of available data, and potential clinical and social impact of using the test in practice.
Who is involved: EWG, with support from CDC-based EGAPP staff and consultants.
Transparency: Review of comments from industry and a range of stakeholders (e.g., from professional organizations, health plans, consumer groups, and public health programs).
Products:
Peer-reviewed, published EWG Recommendation Statements
Recommendation Statement Development Process
Summary: EGAPP initiative products are disseminated to stakeholders through publications, web sites, and presentations.
Who is involved: CDC-based EGAPP staff, EGAPP Stakeholders Group (ESG), EGAPP Working Group (EWG).
Transparency: Stakeholder peer review, CDC clearance.
Dissemination Processes for EGAPP Products and Informational Messages
Primary EGAPP products |
Secondary EGAPP products |
|
---|---|---|
Commissioned evidence reports
|
Announcements of EGAPP initiative primary products and other updates (CDC-based EGAPP staff)
|
For more information see EGAPP FAQs or CDC EGAPP Initiative
- Page last reviewed: December 6, 2016 (archived document)
- Content Source: