Review and finalisation
Guidelines Committee all-Handbook review
Guideline Committee members reviewed the full draft of the Handbook between September and November 2013.
The main remit of this review was to ensure consistency across sections, also noting gaps or unnecessary duplication, as well as checking all content section-by-section.
External stakeholder review was conducted in November and December 2013.
Selected external stakeholder organisations were invited to review the draft Handbook and submit comment. The invitation included log-in details for the Handbook website and a submission form. Stakeholders were advised that the secretariat would acknowledged receipt of each submission but would not enter into correspondence about the comments made. The stakeholders were given 4 weeks to review the Handbook and make their submission.
A total of 27 organisations were invited to review. These included:
- National Asthma Council Australia member bodies
- Colleges/associations of relevant health professions
- Other stakeholder organisations including patient advocacy organisation, Asthma Australia
- Pharmaceutical companies with a respiratory interest
More than 300 individual comments were included in the resulting submissions. Each was considered by the Secretariat and Guidelines Committee during the finalisation phase of the Handbook’s development.
External expert review
Two independent experts were asked to review the full draft Handbook online version between December 2013 and January 2014. They were:
- Professor Christine Jenkins AM, adult respiratory physician
- Dr Ronald McCoy, general practitioner
Neither reviewer had been involved in the development of the draft Handbook.
In February 2014, a range of representative users were engaged to review the Handbook website for functionality and ease of navigation. The testers were provided with various clinical scenarios to use as test cases for the site's usability and were also asked to suggest their own scenarios.
Feedback indicated that the website was structured logically and was user friendly, so no changes were made to the website design in response to the testing. Testers were asked to suggest key words and terms that they would use to search for information for each scenario; this feedback was taken into account in finalising the website's meta data.
All feedback received during the review phase was aggregated and distributed to Committee members. Small issues were resolved in an ongoing manner via email and regular teleconferences between November 2013 and January 2014. Complex or more significant issues were deferred for resolution until the post-review face-to-face meeting in February 2014.
At the final post-review meeting, the Guidelines Committee considered and resolved all outstanding issues that arose during the review phase and approved the final revisions to be made preceding publication.