Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Med Life with Dr. Horton
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • Classified ads
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Activate online account
    • Look up login
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Members Corner
    • Print copies of CMAJ
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
    • Activate subscription
    • Look up login
    • Manage account
    • Manage IPs
    • View Reports
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JPN

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • My Cart
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JPN
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • My Cart
  • Log in
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Med Life with Dr. Horton
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • Classified ads
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Activate online account
    • Look up login
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Members Corner
    • Print copies of CMAJ
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
    • Activate subscription
    • Look up login
    • Manage account
    • Manage IPs
    • View Reports
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Evidence

Practice guidelines for clinical prevention

Do patients, physicians and experts share common ground?

Marie-Dominique Beaulieu, Eveline Hudon, Daniele Roberge, Raynald Pineault, Danielle Forte and Judith Legare
CMAJ September 07, 1999 161 (5) 519-523;
Marie-Dominique Beaulieu
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eveline Hudon
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniele Roberge
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Raynald Pineault
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Danielle Forte
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Judith Legare
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background: Clinical practice guidelines, such as those of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, although based on sound evidence, may conflict with the perceived needs and expectations of patients and physicians. This may jeopardize the implementation of such guidelines. This study was undertaken to explore patients' and family physicians' acceptance of the task force's recommendations and the values and criteria upon which the opinions of these 2 groups are based.

Methods: Focus groups were used to collect study data. In total, 35 physicians (in 7 groups) and 75 patient representatives (in 9 groups) participated in the focus groups. An inductive approach was used to develop coding grids and to generate themes from the transcripts of the interviews.

Results: Physicians expressed resistance to discontinuing the annual check-up, which they viewed as an organizational strategy to counteract the many barriers to preventive care that they encounter. They reported difficulties in explaining to their patients the recommendations of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, which they found complex and inconsistent with popular wisdom. Both patients and physicians attributed high value to the detection of insidious diseases, even in the absence of proof of the effectiveness of such activity.

Interpretation: The patients and family physicians who participated in this study shared many opinions on the value of preventive activities that depart from the values used by "prevention experts" such as the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care in establishing their recommendations. A better understanding of the values of patients and physicians would help guideline developers to create better targeted communication strategies to take these discrepancies into account.

View Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

CMAJ
Vol. 161, Issue 5
7 Sep 1999
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Practice guidelines for clinical prevention
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
Citation Tools
Practice guidelines for clinical prevention
Marie-Dominique Beaulieu, Eveline Hudon, Daniele Roberge, Raynald Pineault, Danielle Forte, Judith Legare
CMAJ Sep 1999, 161 (5) 519-523;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Practice guidelines for clinical prevention
Marie-Dominique Beaulieu, Eveline Hudon, Daniele Roberge, Raynald Pineault, Danielle Forte, Judith Legare
CMAJ Sep 1999, 161 (5) 519-523;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Interpretation
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Scopus
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Thou shalt versus thou shalt not: a meta-synthesis of GPs' attitudes to clinical practice guidelines
  • Who's Calling the Shots? Pediatricians' Adherence to the 2001-2003 Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine-Shortage Recommendations
  • Comparative trial of a short workshop designed to enhance appropriate use of screening tests by family physicians
  • How do patients' treatment preferences compare with those of clinicians?
  • Prisoners of ritual
  • Scopus (39)
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Use of β-blocker therapy in older patients after acute myocardial infarction in Ontario
  • Effectiveness of in vitro fertilization with intracytoplasmic sperm injection for severe male infertility
  • Response of paramedics to terminally ill patients with cardiac arrest: an ethical dilemma
Show more Evidence

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Sections
    • Guidelines
  • Topics
    • Patient education

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Alerts
  • RSS

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • CMA Members
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact

Copyright 2019, Joule Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

Powered by HighWire