This Organizational Statement was last revised by the AGA Institute Governing Board, (5) VOTED, November 2015.
Clinical practice updates are intended to inform clinicians, payors and other interested parties of the opinion of AGA concerning areas of clinical practice and/or technologies that are widely available or new to the practice of gastroenterology. Clinical practice updates are as evidence-based as possible but tend to be shorter than AGA guidelines, and may be developed jointly with other societies, when applicable. Clinical practice updates are the current state-of-the-art and by definition will include a combination of strong evidence-based information, and when not available, best consensus opinion.
The AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee will consist of 11 members (including a chair). The chair of the AGA Institute Clinical Guidelines Committee (who shall not count against the maximum membership) shall serve as an ex officio member. A councillor (who shall not count against the maximum membership) shall serve as the governing board’s liaison to the committee and shall attend all committee meetings. Additional members of the governing board (who shall not count against the maximum membership) may be assigned as team members to the committee but are not intended to attend any committee meetings. A chair-elect (who shall not count against the maximum membership) shall be appointed one year before the end of the term of the chair.
Appointment terms of all committee members shall be for two years, with the opportunity to be renewed for an additional year based on attendance and performance. One-third of the maximum terms shall expire annually.
The committee chair is authorized to create small, temporary subgroups consisting of members and nonmembers of the committee to address policy development and oversight of specific issues within the committee’s mission. Costs of such subgroups must be included in the committee’s approved budget.
- Create, and revise as necessary, a template for the development of clinical practice updates, to include: 1) defining the clinical issue; 2) summarizing current knowledge; 3) identifying information gaps and future research needs; and 4) summarizing current clinical practice standards acknowledging that this could change with new research.
- Annually identify eight clinical practice update topics, based upon input from the AGA Institute Governing Board and committees.
- Identify clinical practice update authors.
- Review and approve final drafts of clinical practice updates.
- Review and recommend for approval any consensus statements submitted by another society or AGA member for AGA endorsement.
An annual “Call for Topics” will be distributed to AGA leadership and all committees. The list of topics is reviewed by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee for consideration as future topics. Clinical practice updates may also be commissioned at the request of the AGA Institute Governing Board.
The AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee annually reviews clinical practice updates to ensure that they are current. If the documents are out of date or if new evidence (e.g., practice guidelines) have subsequently been updated and/or published on the topic, the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee oversees a process to determine whether Clinical Practice Updates should be sunset or revised.
Once a topic has been chosen, the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee will identify a committee member to serve as a supervisor. The role of the supervisor is to facilitate consensus development for the clinical practice update authors, manage timely completion of the document including author adherence to deadlines, and write a brief background summary of the topic to be submitted for review by the AGA journals and governing board before development.
Each clinical practice update will be authored by two to three content experts on the topic being addressed. The AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee recommends individuals to serve as authors, who should ideally be from different institutions. Clinical practice update authors are required to attend teleconferences, as needed, and adhere to document deadlines. The content experts will divide amongst themselves the task of writing the document based on current best evidence and practice.
The AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee will draft an annual list of topics proposed by members and the public. Alternatively, single-topic proposals may be submitted to the committee from external sources throughout the year. The topic proposal(s) must provide a background statement indicating why the topic was selected. Topic(s), along with suggested authors, are run by Gastroenterology and Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology editors to ensure no similar topics are already going to be published. Gastroenterology gets first refusal.
The editors should further ensure that there is no obvious overlap with works in progress. If there is some overlap, the editors might work with the committee to modify the paper to make it unique. AGA staff will aim to regularly communicate with guideline development staff at ASGE and ACG to prevent overlap between societies.
Topics are then submitted to the AGA Institute Governing Board and officially approved for development. Clinical practice updates will be developed by chosen authors with supervision from a committee member, and the final drafts will be submitted to Gastroenterology and/or Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology for publication. The destination journal may send the paper through peer review as it sees fit. The purpose of peer review is to improve the paper. Rejection would be unlikely but not impossible. The editor has the prerogative to send the completed paper to the sister journal, although that would be an uncommon event. If the clinical practice update is rejected for publication by both journals, it will be posted on AGA’s website. This possibility will be stated in all initial author letters.
In the event that a non-guideline expert review or consensus document is submitted to AGA seeking the organization’s endorsement, the document will be sent to all current members of the committee. The committee will have a minimum of two weeks to review the document and submit its input as to whether it recommends that it be endorsed by AGA, as well as any additional comments as it sees fit. Committee members will be asked to keep these specific questions in mind as they review:
- Does this study provide information that fills an important clinical need in gastroenterology?
- Is the article content fair and balanced?
- If a consensus document, were appropriate methods used to reach consensus?
- Would this article or a synopsis of this article be appropriate for publication in one of AGA’s journals?
The committee members’ recommendations and comments will be anonymized, compiled, and sent to the AGA Institute Governing Board for a final review during the governing board’s monthly meeting.
The committee is authorized to hold two face-to-face meetings per year, one in September and one at Digestive Disease Week®, and teleconferences as needed.
- Joseph K. Lim, MD, AGAF (chair)
- Andrew Y. Wang, MD, AGAF (chair-elect)
- Jana Al Hashash, MD
- Seth Crockett, MD, MPH, AGAF
- Joseph D. Feuerstein, MD
- Deborah Fisher, MD, MHS, AGAF
- C. Prakash Gyawali, MD, MRCP, AGAF
- Cynthia Ko, MD, MS
- Alberto Rubio-Tapia, MD
- Shailja C. Shah, MD, MPH
- Kaveh Sharzehi, MD
- Aasma Shaukat, MD, MPH, AGAF
- Shahnaz Sultan, MD, MHSc, AGAF (ex-officio)