{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01559792027729636, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.0426829268292686, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Genesis of medical thromboprophylaxis guidelines in Australia: a need for transparency and standardisation in guideline development

Clinical guidelines are recommendations based on systematic identification and synthesis of the best available scientific evidence. The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) has published standards for guideline development. According to the NHMRC standards, guideline development must be a transparent and independent process, with full disclosure of any potential competing interests. Australian guidelines for prevention of venous thromboembolism have been published by an autonomous group. Several features of the processes used to produce and distribute these guidelines, such as pharmaceutical sponsorship, do not meet NHMRC endorsement standards. The guidelines may overstate the need for thrombo‐prophylaxis in medical patients, and thus expose some patients to an unnecessary risk of bleeding complications. Despite this, these guidelines have been taken up avidly by national and state bodies responsible for safety and quality in health care, and mandated national application has been proposed.