Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: Abstract  Background  Reasons for intentional non-adherence to guidelines are largely unknown. The objective of this systematic review was to gain insight into and categorize reasons for intentional non-adherence and their validity. Non-adherence might be a conscious choice by either the clinician or the patient, and is not influenced by external factors (e.g. lack of knowledge or resources).  use the term  intentional non-adherence  to describe this class of reasons for not following guideline recommendations.  Methods  Two independent reviers examined MEDLINE citations for studies that investigated reasons for guideline non-adherence. The obtained articles re assessed for relevance and quality. Our search yielded 2912 articles, of which 16 matched our inclusion criteria and quality requirements.  planned to determine an overall ranking of categories of non-adherence.  Results  Seven studies investigated clinical reasons and performed adjudication, while nine studies did not perform adjudication. Non-adherence varied beten 8.2% and 65.3%. Meta-analysis proved unfeasible due to heterogeneity of study methodologies. The percentage of reasons deemed valid by adjudication ranged from 6.6% to 93.6%. Guideline non-adherence was predominantly valid; contra-indications and patient preference re most often reported as reasons for intentional non-adherence.  Conclusion   found a wide range of rates of non-adherence to clinical guidelines. This non-adherence is often supported by valid reasons, mainly related to contra-indications and patient preference. Therefore,  submit that many guideline deviations are intentional and these deviations do not necessarily impact quality of care.
['Derk L. Arts', 'Albertine G. Voncken', 'Stephanie Medlock', 'Ameen Abu-Hanna', 'Henk van Weert']
I am writing a research paper on a idea Reasons for intentional guideline non-adherence: A systematic review
[{"from": "human", "value": "I am writing a research paper on a idea Reasons for intentional guideline non-adherence: A systematic review"}, {"from": "gpt", "value": "Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: Abstract  Background  Reasons for intentional non-adherence to guidelines are largely unknown. The objective of this systematic review was to gain insight into and categorize reasons for intentional non-adherence and their validity. Non-adherence might be a conscious choice by either the clinician or the patient, and is not influenced by external factors (e.g. lack of knowledge or resources).  use the term  intentional non-adherence  to describe this class of reasons for not following guideline recommendations.  Methods  Two independent reviers examined MEDLINE citations for studies that investigated reasons for guideline non-adherence. The obtained articles re assessed for relevance and quality. Our search yielded 2912 articles, of which 16 matched our inclusion criteria and quality requirements.  planned to determine an overall ranking of categories of non-adherence.  Results  Seven studies investigated clinical reasons and performed adjudication, while nine studies did not perform adjudication. Non-adherence varied beten 8.2% and 65.3%. Meta-analysis proved unfeasible due to heterogeneity of study methodologies. The percentage of reasons deemed valid by adjudication ranged from 6.6% to 93.6%. Guideline non-adherence was predominantly valid; contra-indications and patient preference re most often reported as reasons for intentional non-adherence.  Conclusion   found a wide range of rates of non-adherence to clinical guidelines. This non-adherence is often supported by valid reasons, mainly related to contra-indications and patient preference. Therefore,  submit that many guideline deviations are intentional and these deviations do not necessarily impact quality of care."}]