An organization that is a member of the AWMF

AWMF S1 guideline representing expert recommendations developed through informal consensus.

AWMF S2e guideline based on systematic literature search and evaluation.

AWMF S2k guideline based on structured consensus by a representative panel.

AWMF S3 guideline based on systematic evidence review and structured consensus by a representative panel.

List of citations.

A structured definition of the comparator as defined for a PICO question.

A structured definition of the intervention as defined for a PICO question.

A structured definition of the outcome as defined for a PICO question.

A structured definition of the population as defined for a PICO question.

A structured assessment of the certainty of evidence for a specific outcome.

A structured assessment of the quality of guidelines using the AGREE II instrument.

A structured assessment of the certainty of evidence using AMSTAR 2.

Structured assessment of risk of bias using Cochrane RoB tool.

Structured assessment of risk of bias using ROBIS (Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews).

A structured assessment of the internal validity of evidence.

A structured assessment of the certainty of evidence for a specific outcome, including GRADE rating.

A structured assessment of the certainty of evidence for a specific outcome, including Oxford 2011 rating.

A structured assessment of the overall evidence for a specific outcome.

Intermediate profile that re-slices the extendedContactDetail extension from EvidenceReport. This workaround profile isolates the re-slicing to avoid 'Named items are out of order in the slice' errors in derived profiles. See profile comments for detailed explanation.

Clinical Practice Guideline

Attachment to a Clinical Practice Guideline

A person that authored a guideline.

The role of the author of the guideline.

Guideline Registry Record containing metadata and registry-specific information for a clinical practice guideline.

A profile for medical societies.

Represents evidence supporting a specific outcome within a body of clinical or scientific evidence.

A structured definition of the PICO question in the context of guidelines and recommendations.

An organization that represents patients

Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendation

A structured assessment of the evidence and consensus that underpins a recommendation.

A structured assessment of the evidence and consensus that underpins a recommendation, including AWMF rating.

A structured assessment of the evidence and consensus that underpins a recommendation based on expert consensus.

A structured assessment of the evidence and consensus that underpins a recommendation using the GRADE evidence rating system.

A structured assessment of the evidence and consensus that underpins a recommendation using the OXFORD 2009 evidence rating system.

A structured assessment of the evidence and consensus that underpins a recommendation using the OXFORD 2011 evidence rating system.

A structured assessment of the evidence and consensus that underpins a recommendation using the SIGN evidence rating system.

This extension provides additional contact details for individuals or organizations associated with an artifact (e.g., a clinical document, guideline, or other composition).

This extension allows for the specification of the language(s) the author contributed to a section in a FHIR Composition.

This extension allows for the indication of the period during which the guideline is open for consultation.

This extension allows for the indication of the date when the guideline was first published.

This extension allows for the indication of the role of the author of the guideline.

An extension to specify medical subjects related to an organization.

An extension to specify medical subject category related to an organization.

This extension allows for the indication of the date when the guideline is planned to be completed.

This extensions allows for the indication of the date when the guideline was published.

This extension allows for the indication of the status of a recommendation in the context of an updated guideline version along with an optional explanatory text

This extensions allows for the indication of the date the guideline project was registered.

This extension defines a classification for the 'relatesTo' relationship using a CodeableConcept.

This extension defines a label for the 'relatesTo' relationship using a CodeableConcept.

This extension allows for the assignment of a specific code to a section within a Composition resource. The code provides a standardized way to categorize or identify the content of the section, enabling better organization, searchability, and interoperability of clinical documents or other structured artifacts.

This extension allows for the indication of the target audience for the section

This extension allows for the indication of keywords associated with the section

This extension allows for the indication of the Language of the Section.

This extension allows for the indication of the date when the guideline was submitted to the system.

ValueSet encompassing all domains from the AGREE II instrument.

ValueSet encompassing all overall confidence ratings from the AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal tool.

ValueSet listing values representing guideline classes according to the AWMF.

ValueSet listing values to define the guideline status according to the AWMF.

ValueSet listing various body system conditions

ValueSet listing levels of care.

ValueSet listing stages of care from prevention to rehabilitation.

ValueSet listing different clinical application types

ValueSet listing types of content that can be part of a guideline or recommendation.

ValueSet listing types of dissemination websites

ValueSet listing types of patient encounters based on hospitalization status.

ValueSet listing roles that a author can have in a guideline.

ValueSet listing contact points relevant to guidelines, such as registrants, coordinators, and main contacts.

ValueSet listing different guideline release types

ValueSet listing values to use to define guideline sections

ValueSet listing codes representing intended audiences for a section

ValueSet listing values to define the level of consensus for a recommendation.

ValueSet listing values to classify medical subjects into different categories.

ValueSet encompassing all levels from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2009 Levels of Evidence.

ValueSet encompassing all levels from the OCEBM 2011 Levels of Evidence.

ValueSet listing different terms related to PICO question and objects

ValueSet encompassing all risk of bias judgment values from the ROBIS tool.

ValueSet encompassing all risk of bias domains from the ROBIS tool.

ValueSet defining if the alternatives are acceptable for the target population and its implementors?

ValueSet listing values to represent the summary of the most important benefits and harms

Codes from EvidenceCertaintyRating related to certainty of evidence

ValueSet listing codes from EvidenceCertaintyRating related to degree of concern

ValueSet listing values to represent how the different alternatives affect equity

ValueSet listing values to reprensent how feasible will it be to implement the different alternatives and if there are any issues

ValueSet listing typical patient preferences and values as well as common issues or expected variability

ValueSet listing values to indicate if there are issues related to costs or resource use.

ValueSet defining the direction of a clinical recommendation.

ValueSet representing the review-related status of a recommendation in a new guideline version

ValueSet of strength of recommendations as defined in AWMF guideline methodology.

ValueSet listing different synthesis Types of recommendations

ValueSet listing different tags to use for recommendations

ValueSet listing types of remarks that can be associated with guidelines, including restrictions, warnings, and additional notes.

ValueSet listing values to represent the overall judgment of risk of bias assessed by the RoB2 tool for evaluating risk of bias for randomized trials.

ValueSet encompassing all grades of recommendation from the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) Grades of Recommendation.

ValueSet encompassing all levels from the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) Levels of Evidence.

ValueSet listing patient population categories for guidelines, such as adults and children/adolescents.

CodeSystem representing the domains assessed by the AGREE II instrument for evaluating the quality of clinical practice guidelines.

CodeSystem representing the overall confidence ratings from the AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal tool.

As part of the project planning for the creation or updating of a guideline, a decision should be made at an early stage about the planned level classification ("S classification") according to the AWMF's system of rules (1-3). The S-classification scheme of the AWMF differentiates between the classes S1 treatment recommendation as well as S2e, S2k and S3 guideline. The "S" stands for the extent of the applied systematic approach in the development process of a guideline. Each class thus stands for a specific methodological concept that must be presented in a way that is comprehensible to the users. The choice of class is based on the question of how much effort is appropriate and feasible. The need for legitimacy for the implementation of the guideline (convincing the target group) must be taken into account. When choosing a higher S-classification in the context of updating a guideline, the adaptation to the corresponding methodology has to be considered.

CodeSystem representing the guideline status according to the AWMF.

CodeSystem representing various body system conditions.

CodeSystem defining different care settings, including levels of care, healthcare services, and treatment contexts.

CodeSystem defining different clinical application types

CodeSystem defining types of contact points for a guideline

CodeSystem defining GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) Framework Certainty Ratings

CodeSystem defining values to represent the GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) Framework Certainty Type

CodeSystem defining roles for the author of the guideline.

CodeSystem defining different guideline release types

Sections of a guideline, describing various aspects such as its intention, target patient group, care setting, and other relevant contextual information.

CodeSystem defining possible intended audiences for a section

CodeSystem defining the values representing the level of consensus for a recommendation.

CodeSystem defining values to classify medical subjects into different categories.

CodeSystem representing the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2009 CEBM Levels of Evidence

CodeSystem representing the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence.

CodeSystem defining different terms related to PICO question and objects

CodeSystem representing the judgment of risk of bias assessed by the ROBIS tool for evaluating risk of bias in systematic reviews.

CodeSystem representing the domains assessed by the ROBIS tool for evaluating risk of bias in systematic reviews.

CodeSystem defining the direction of a clinical recommendation.

CodeSystem defining values indicating how a recommendation relates to a new revision of a recommendation

CodeSystem defining the grading of recommendations according to German guideline methodology as used in AWMF S3 guidelines.

CodeSystem defining values representing the synthesis type of a recommendation

CodeSystem defining codes to represent tags for recommendations

CodeSystem defining types of related artifacts that can be part of a guideline.

CodeSystem defining different types of remarks that can be associated with guidelines, including restrictions, warnings, and additional notes.

CodeSystem representing the overall judgment of risk of bias assessed by the RoB2 tool for evaluating risk of bias for randomized trials.

CodeSystem representing the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Grades of Recommendation.

CodeSystem representing the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) Levels of Evidence.

CodeSystem defining the intended patient population for whom the guideline is applicable.

CodeSystem representing different codes of interest for the Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF)

An example of an AWMF S3 guideline.

An example of an AWMF S1 guideline.

An example of an AWMF S2e guideline.

An example of an AWMF S2k guideline.

An example of an AWMF member organization.

Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF)

Certainty of Evidence Rating Ris of Bias for Cognitive Tests When Suspecting Dementia on Sensitivity

Certainty of Evidence Rating Ris of Bias for Cognitive Tests When Suspecting Dementia on Specificity

Certainty of evidence rating for the impact of Multiplex-PCR-Diagnostik on antibiotic days

Certainty of evidence rating for the impact of Multiplex-PCR-Diagnostik on mortality

Certainty of evidence rating for the impact of Multiplex-PCR-Diagnostik on time to deescalation

Citation for the Systematic Review by Tsoi et al. 2015

Concept map from concepts from standardized vocabularies that are not labelled as 'standard' in Athena – OHDSI Vocabularies Repository to Concept IDs from 'standard' concepts

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin e.V. (DGAI)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Chirurgie e.V. (DGCH)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Hygiene und Mikrobiologie e.V. (DGHM)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Infektiologie e.V. (DGI)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internistische Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin e.V. (DGIIN)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Innere Medizin e.V. (DGIM)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Pneumologie und Beatmungsmedizin e.V. (DGP)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde e. V. (DGPPN)

Deutsche Röntgengesellschaft, Gesellschaft für Medizinische Radiologie e.V. (DRG)

Deutsche Sepsis-Gesellschaft e.V. (DSG)

Evidence for the impact of Multiplex-PCR-Diagnostik on antibiotic days

Evidence for the impact of Multiplex-PCR-Diagnostik on mortality

Evidence for the impact of Multiplex-PCR-Diagnostik on time to deescalation

Foliensatz Leitlinie 020-013

Gesellschaft für Virologie e.V. (GfV)

An example of a guideline attachment.

An example of a guideline attachment for the patient version.

An example of a guideline author.

An example of a guideline author role.

An example of a guideline.

An example of a guideline registry record.

Fails because the contributing author points to a Practitioner instead of an Organization.

Passes because the leading author points to an Organization.

Fails because the leading author points to a Practitioner instead of an Organization.

Wie wird eine HAP klinisch diagnostiziert und welche Differenzialdiagnosen sind zu beachten?

Wie wird eine HAP klinisch diagnostiziert und welche Differenzialdiagnosen sind zu beachten?

Wie wird eine HAP klinisch diagnostiziert und welche Differenzialdiagnosen sind zu beachten?

Implementierungshilfe Leitlinie 020-013

Jessica Rademacher

Jessica Rademacher for DGP in the context of 020-013

Kurzfassung Leitlinie 020-013

Langfassung Leitlinie 020-013

Leitlinienreport Leitlinie 020-013

An example of a medical society.

Wird der Einsatz von Multiplex-PCR im Rahmen der mikrobiologischen Diagnostik bei Patienten mit Verdacht auf nosokomiale Pneumonie empfohlen?

Netzwerk chronisch pulmonale Aspergillose (CPAnet)

Outcome Antibiotic Days

Outcome Mortality

Outcome Time to Deescalation

Paul-Ehrlich-Gesellschaft für Infektionstherapie e.V. (PEG)

Vergleichsintervention: Kein Test, Mini-Mental-Status-Test (Standard)

Intervention: Verschiedene kognitive Kurztests

Sensitivität für die Indikation einer Demenz

Spezifizität für die Indikation einer Demenz

Population: Menschen in nicht-spezialisierten Settings (z. B. Hausarztpraxis, Krankenhaus), die über die kognitive Störungen berichten oder bei denen eine kognitive Störung beobachtet wird

Schlüsselfrage: Sind Tests in nicht-spezialisierten Settings sinnvoll, um eine Demenz zu erkennen bei Personen, die kognitive Störungen berichten oder bei denen eine kognitive Störung beobachtet wird und die einer solchen Untersuchung zustimmen?

Patienteninformation Leitlinie 020-013

An example of a recommendation.

Justification for Recommendation Cognitive Tests When Suspecting Dementia

Justification for Recommendation HAP Diagnose A

Justification for Recommendation HAP Diagnose B

Justification for Recommendation Multiplex-PCR-Diagnostik

Robert Koch-Institut

S3-Leitlinie Demenzen Living Guideline - Langfassung

S3-Leitlinie Demenzen Living Guideline - Record

S3-Leitlinie zur Epidemiologie, Diagnostik und Therapie erwachsener Patienten mit nosokomialer Pneumonie

S3-Leitlinie zur Epidemiologie, Diagnostik und Therapie erwachsener Patienten mit nosokomialer Pneumonie

Sind Tests in nicht-spezialisierten Settings sinnvoll, um eine Demenz zu erkennen bei Personen, die kognitive Störungen berichten oder bei denen eine kognitive Störung beobachtet wird und die einer solchen Untersuchung zustimmen?

Tests that author-leading-vs-contributing-exclusive fails when author has both roles.

Tests that inv-require-official-identifier fails when no official identifier is present.

Tests that inv-require-official-identifier fails when no official identifier is present.

Tests that author-registrant-singleton fails when no registrant is present.

Tests that preliminary-composition-needs-consultation-period passes when period is present.

Tests that preliminary-composition-needs-consultation-period fails when period is missing.

Tests that registered-composition-needs-planned-completion-date passes when date is present.

Tests that registered-composition-needs-planned-completion-date fails when date is missing.

Tests that inv-require-release-type-if-registered passes when release type is present.

Tests that inv-require-release-type-if-registered fails when release type tag is missing.

Tests that inv-require-release-type-if-registered fails when release type code is invalid.

Tests that author-registrant-singleton passes when exactly one registrant is present.

Tests that inv-require-official-identifier fails when two official identifiers are present.

Tests that inv-require-official-identifier fails when two official identifiers are present.

Tests that author-registrant-singleton fails when two registrants are present.

Tests that inv-version-major-minor fails when version has three parts.

Tests that inv-version-major-minor fails when version has three parts.

Tests that inv-version-major-minor fails when version is text.

Tests that inv-version-major-minor fails when version is text.

Tests that inv-version-major-minor fails when version has 'v' prefix.

Tests that inv-version-major-minor fails when version has 'v' prefix.