Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Springer Nature [academic journals on nature.com], Bone Marrow Transplantation, 2023

DOI: 10.1038/s41409-023-01958-w

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Practice harmonization workshops of EBMT: an expert-based approach to generate practical and contemporary guidelines within the arena of hematopoietic cell transplantation and cellular therapy

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

AbstractFor hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) and cellular therapy (CT), clinical patient care is localized, and practices may differ between countries and from center to center even within the same country. Historically, international guidelines were not always adapted to the changing daily clinical practice and practical topics there were not always addressed. In the absence of well-established guidelines, centers tended to develop local procedures/policies, frequently with limited communication with other centers. To try to harmonize localized clinical practices for malignant and non-malignant hematological disorders within EBMT scope, the practice harmonization and guidelines (PH&G) committee of the EBMT will co-ordinate workshops with topic-specific experts from interested centers. Each workshop will discuss a specific issue and write guidelines/recommendations that practically addresses the topic under review. To provide clear, practical and user-friendly guidelines when international consensus is lacking, the EBMT PH&G committee plans to develop European guidelines by HCT and CT physicians for peers’ use. Here, we define how workshops will be conducted and guidelines/recommendations produced, approved and published. Ultimately, there is an aspiration for some topics, where there is sufficient evidence base to be considered for systematic reviews, which are a more robust and future-proofed basis for guidelines/recommendations than consensus opinion.