Development of the Guidelines

The Guidelines were developed by:  

    • Consulting with an expert panel (steering committee); 
    • Updating the Review of the Evidence for treatment of alcohol problems and publishing these as a companion document; 
    • Seeking feedback from clinicians concerning the previous edition (see appendix of the evidence review for comprehensive overview); 
    • Consumer engagement (see appendix of the evidence review for comprehensive overview); 
    • Peer review by clinicians and researchers;  
    • Review of all recommendations by the steering committee; 
    • Public consultation process 

In developing the Guidelines, the chapter authors relied on evidence from well-designed meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials wherever possible. Where this evidence was not available, recommendations are based upon the best available research or clinical experience. In almost all cases, the relevant evidence is cited in the accompanying Review of the Evidence and removed from the Guidelines themselves. In turn, the Review of the Evidence has been structured to match the Guidelines, to clarify the evidence that was considered for each recommendation (to the extent that this could be achieved). The breadth of the health impacts of alcohol, affected population groups and treatment approaches precluded systematic literature reviews being undertaken for each clinical recommendation, as required by the NHMRC Guidelines development process. 

Each chapter begins with an overview of the topic and is guided by clinical questions to inform recommendations for practice. The recommendations within each chapter identify key issues for clinical practice and have an identified supporting ‘grade of recommendation’; they are consolidated at the beginning of the Guidelines. Consistent with contemporary approaches to guideline development (NHMRC, 2009), strength of recommendations is presented as A, B, C, D or GPP (see Table 1.1).

Table 1.1: Definition of NHMRC (2009) grades of evidence

Grade of recommendation Description
A Body of evidence can be trusted to guide practice
B Body of evidence can be trusted to guide practice in most situations
C Body of evidence provides some support for recommendation(s) but care should be taken in its application
D Body of evidence is weak and recommendation must be applied with caution
GPP Good practice point, but there is insufficient direct evidence for a higher grade