About my blog

A Socratic paradox of guideline development: those who have never done it think it’s simple; those who have looked into it a little find it bewildering. From the methodologist’s perspective, the truth lies somewhere in between.

This blog shares reflections from my work as a guideline methodology expert, drawing on experience across publicly available guideline projects and broader methodological work. It is structured in two complementary parts:

Reflections of a guideline methodologist — a philosophical exploration of how evidence is identified, assessed, and translated into guidance. This section considers how methodological choices shape recommendations and, ultimately, influence clinical practice.
 

Practical guidance on guidance — insights, tools, and examples drawn from my work on guideline development groups, peer review, and broader methodological experience. These posts illustrate the challenges, surprises, and lessons that arise when theory meets real-world decision-making, and offer approaches to help navigate the complexities of creating and using guidance.

The posts are written for anyone interested in understanding how guidelines are created, whether you are a clinician, policymaker, researcher, or simply curious about the process behind evidence-based recommendations.

For details about scope, authorship, and use of examples, please read the full disclaimer.

I am a guideline methodology expert, not a subject-matter specialist in Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) or any other clinical area. My involvement, primarily in IPC guideline development, has focused on the application of methodological standards rather than clinical content.

The reflections shared here draw on publicly available guideline projects on which I was an author, as well as broader experience in guideline development across disciplines. Posts focus on methodological lessons, evidence gaps, and the challenges of translating research into guidance, particularly where long-held expert beliefs may not be fully supported by published evidence.

The views expressed are my own and are intended for reflective and educational purposes only. They do not replace, restate or endorse any published guidelines, and readers should always consult the original guideline documents for official recommendations.

Copyright of all published guidelines remains with the commissioning organizations and publishers.