Elsevier

Resuscitation

Volume 156, November 2020, Pages A23-A34
Resuscitation

Evidence Evaluation Process and Management of Potential Conflicts of Interest: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.09.011Get rights and content

Section snippets

Evidence Evaluation Process

The most important product of the ILCOR evidence evaluation process is the summary of the evidence identified (consensus on science) and the accompanying treatment recommendations. ILCOR is committed to transparency in presenting consensus descriptions and summaries of the evidence, and the creation of treatment recommendations whenever consensus can be achieved. The processes to evaluate the information available has evolved substantially over the past 2 decades, as has ILCOR’s approach to

Management of Potential Conflicts of Interest Throughout The Process

To ensure the integrity of the evidence evaluation and the process of consensus on science development, ILCOR followed its rigorous COI management policies at all times. A full description of these policies and their implementation can be found in Part 4 of the 2010 CoSTR.64, 65 Any person involved in any part of the process disclosed all commercial relationships and other potential conflicts by using the standard AHA online COI disclosure process. Disclosure information for writing group

Supplementary Material

Supplementary material to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.09.011.

First page preview

First page preview
Click to open first page preview

References (66)

  • M.J. Holmberg et al.

    Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for cardiac arrest: A systematic review

    Resuscitation.

    (2018)
  • H.J. Schünemann et al.

    GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks for adoption, adaptation, and de novo development of trustworthy recommendations: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2017)
  • N. Santesso et al.

    GRADE guidelines 26: informative statements to communicate the findings of systematic reviews of interventions

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2020)
  • H. Balshem et al.

    GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2011)
  • H.J. Schünemann et al.

    GRADE guidelines: 18. How ROBINS-I and other tools to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies should be used to rate the certainty of a body of evidence

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2019)
  • M. Hultcrantz et al.

    The GRADE Working Group clarifies the construct of certainty of evidence

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2017)
  • Y. Zhang et al.

    GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-Risk of bias and indirectness

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2019)
  • J. Andrews et al.

    GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2013)
  • P.E. Alexander et al.

    World Health Organization strong recommendations based on low-quality evidence (study quality) are frequent and often inconsistent with GRADE guidance

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2016)
  • G.H. Guyatt et al.

    Guideline panels should seldom make good practice statements: guidance from the GRADE Working Group

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2016)
  • H.L. Colquhoun et al.

    Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting

    J Clin Epidemiol.

    (2014)
  • J. Considine et al.

    Chest compression components (rate, depth, chest wall recoil and leaning): A scoping review

    Resuscitation.

    (2020)
  • M. Shuster et al.

    International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation; American Heart Association. Part 4: conflict of interest management before, during, and after the 2010 International Consensus Conference on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations

    Resuscitatio

    (2010)
  • E. Søreide et al.

    The formula for survival in resuscitation

    Resuscitation.

    (2013)
  • International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Task Forces. https://www.ilcor.org/about-ilcor/task-forces/. Accessed...
  • M.F. Hazinski et al.

    Part 1: executive summary: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

    Circulation.

    (2015)
  • P.T. Morley et al.

    Part 2: evidence evaluation and management of conflicts of interest: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

    Circulation.

    (2015)
  • T.M. Olasveengen et al.

    2017 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations summary

    Circulation.

    (2017)
  • J. Soar et al.

    2018 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations Summary

    Circulation.

    (2018)
  • J. Soar et al.

    2019 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces

    Circulation.

    (2019)
  • International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. ILCOR website home page. https://www.ilcor.org/home. Accessed August...
  • International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Continuous evidence evaluation guidance and templates....
  • International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). What is behind ILCOR? YouTube page....
  • Cited by (23)

    • ERC-ESICM guidelines on temperature control after cardiac arrest in adults

      2022, Resuscitation
      Citation Excerpt :

      Both of them were also content experts. We followed a strict conflict of interest (COI) management process.20 All panel members completed COI declarations, which were vetted by the ILCOR and/or ERC COI committees.

    • Resuscitation and emergency care in drowning: A scoping review

      2021, Resuscitation
      Citation Excerpt :

      The scoping review was registered a priori with the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. The review followed the methodological approach described by ILCOR.8–10 The review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR).11

    • European Resuscitation Council and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Guidelines 2021: Post-resuscitation care

      2021, Resuscitation
      Citation Excerpt :

      For the 2020 CoSTR, the six ILCOR task forces performed three types of evidence evaluation: the systematic review, the scoping review, and the evidence update, which covered 184 topics in total.7 It was agreed that only systematic reviews (these used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology) could result in new or modified treatment recommendations.8 The data analysis from each systematic review was presented to the task force, and the task force drafted the summary consensus on science and the treatment recommendations.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This article has been co-published in Circulation.

    View full text