No abstract

Contact me if this article is corrected. CitationsContact me when this article is cited. This article has been cited 29 times. Topic collectionsContact me when new articles are published in these topic areas.

The Secretary's Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children is charged with evaluating conditions nominated for addition to the uniform screening panel and consequently making recommendations to the secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services. This report describes the framework by which the committee approaches its task. Key decision nodes include initial review of every nomination to determine whether conditions are amenable for systematic evidence review, review of systematic evidence reviews conducted by the committee's external review group, and deliberation and formal recommendation for addition or exclusion to the uniform panel. Data analyzed include the accuracy and specificity of screening and diagnostic tests for nominated disorders, the extent of predicted health benefits, harms impact on disease course, and cost from early diagnosis and treatment. The committee process is guided by approaches used by similar entities, but more flexible criteria are sometimes needed to accommodate data limitations stemming from the rarity of many of these conditions. Possible outcomes of committee review range from recommendation to add a nominated condition to the uniform panel; provide feedback on specific gaps in evidence that must be addressed before making a decision; or rejection of a nomination (e.g., because of identified harms). The committee's structured evidence-based assessment of nominated conditions supports a consistently rigorous, iterative and transparent approach to its making recommendations regarding broad population-based screening programs for rare conditions in infants and children.

No abstract

Polygraph tests to detect deceptiveness have been conducted for many years, although their validity has not yet been established. The present review was conducted to aid Congressional consideration of efforts by the Department of Defense and President Reagan to expand use of polygraph tests to large numbers of government employees with access to classified information. Results of this review suggest serious problems with both the theoretical rationale underlying use of polygraph tests and the quality of available evidence that supports the validity of such tests. Although previous evidence suggests that polygraph tests are highly accurate, the validity of these data are not clear, particularly for the uses proposed by the government. As an exemplar of how psychological research evidence influences public policy, this study illustrates both the difficulties and potential of social science theory and research in shaping the direction of political decisions.

An open national public process combined with an evidence-informed evaluation methodology resulted in identification of a balanced, grounded, and parsimonious core set of measures that should become feasible to implement on a widespread scale over time.

The US Secretary of Health and Human Services' Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders and Genetic Diseases in Newborns and Children provides guidance to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with heritable disorders, with a special emphasis on those conditions detectable through newborn screening. Although long-term follow-up is necessary to maximize the benefit of diagnosis through newborn screening, such care is variable and inconsistent. To begin to improve long-term follow-up, the Advisory Committee has identified its key features, including the assurance and provision of quality chronic disease management, condition-specific treatment, and age-appropriate preventive care throughout the lifespan of affected individuals. There are four components central to achieving long-term follow-up: care coordination through a medical home, evidence-based treatment, continuous quality improvement, and new knowledge discovery.

Background: Stakeholders in quality improvement agree on the need for augmenting and synthesising the scientific literature supporting it. The diversity of perspectives, approaches, and contexts critical to advancing quality improvement science, however, creates challenges. The paper explores the heterogeneity in clinical quality improvement intervention (QII) publications. Methods: A preliminary classification framework was developed for QII articles, aiming for categories homogeneous enough to support coherent scientific discussion on QII reporting standards and facilitate systematic review. QII experts were asked to identify articles important to QII science. The framework was tested and revised by applying it to the article set. The final framework screened articles into (1) empirical literature on development and testing of QIIs; (2) QII stories, theories, and frameworks; (3) QII literature syntheses and meta-analyses; or (4) development and testing of QIIrelated tools. To achieve homogeneity, category (1) required division into (1a) development of QIIs; 1(b) history, documentation, or description of QIIs; or (1c) success, effectiveness or impact of QIIs. Results: By discussing unique issues and established standards relevant to each category, QII stakeholders can advance QII practice and science, including the scope and conduct of systematic literature reviews.