EVIDENCE OS / DELIVERY SAMPLE

Five existing PICOs with quarterly update decisions

Real sources · Illustrative request · Sample version

Customer question

Hypothetical commission: a published guideline’s secretariat monitors important trials and corrections.

Does new information trigger substantive updates, and what is delivered when nothing changes?

Predefined rules produce trigger rationale and scope. No-update scans still deliver dates/coverage; substantive updates need separate approval.

Quarterly surveillance and triggers

Check / stageChart content
Scan five PICOsPreserve dates, databases, additions and corrections
Compare baselineAssess implications for evidence and discussion
No trigger / proposed updateNo change still documented; scope and budget precede updates

Illustrative yearly service: five PICOs, quarterly scans, up to 500 new records and 40 full texts. Not a completed comprehensive review.

Analysis excerpt

CheckFinding / sample contentUse
New trialCheck whether it matches an existing PICOExplain against predefined triggers
Correction or retractionLocate affected sources and conclusionsState whether urgent discussion is warranted
No triggerNo update does not mean no recordDeliver coverage, dates and rationale

Delivery manifest

FileFormatContents
Quarterly surveillance memorandumPDFAdditions, corrections, no triggers and update rationale
Five-PICO change logXLSXGuideline baseline, sources/dates and affected questions
Substantive update proposalPDFWhen triggered: questions, methods, material and budget; otherwise no trigger

This is an illustrative formal delivery manifest. This pack supplies an HTML report, CSV tables and a source register. Agree formal formats, quantities and scope in the quote.

Acceptance criteria

Sources

  1. NICE · Ensuring guidelines are current and accurate
    https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg20/chapter/ensuring-that-published-guidelines-are-current-and-accurate