Writing Committee Members: Deepak L. Bhatt, MD, FACC, FAHA, Co-Chair, James Scheiman, MD, FACG, Co-Chair,1 Neena S. Abraham, MD, MSCE, FACG,1 Elliott M. Antman, MD, FACC, FAHA,2 Francis K. L. Chan, MD, FACG,1 Curt D. Furberg, MD, FAHA,2 David A. Johnson, MD, FACG,1 Kenneth W. Mahaffey, MD, FACC,1 Eamonn M. Quigley, MD, FACG1
ACCF Task Force Members: Robert A. Harrington, MD, FACC, Chair, Eric R. Bates, MD, FACC, Charles R. Bridges, MD, MPH, FACC, Mark J. Eisenberg, MD, MPH, FACC, Victor A. Ferrari, MD, FACC, Mark A. Hlatky, MD, FACC, Sanjay Kaul MBBS, FACC, Jonathan R. Lindner, MD, FACC,3 David J. Moliterno, MD, FACC, Debabrata Mukherjee, MD, FACC, Richard S. Schofield, MD, FACC,3 Robert S. Rosenson, MD, FACC, James H. Stein, MD, FACC, Howard H. Weitz, MD, FACC, and Deborah J. Wesley, RN, BSN
1American College of Gastroenterology Representative; 2American Heart Association Representative; and 3Former Task Force member during this writing effort
A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents
This article is copublished in the November 2008 issue of the American Journal of Gastroenterology and the October 28, 2008, issue of Circulation.
Am J Gastroenterol 2008;103:2890-2907
This document has been developed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents, the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), and the American Heart Association (AHA). Expert consensus documents (ECDs) are intended to inform practitioners, payers, and other interested parties of the opinion of the ACCF and document cosponsors concerning evolving areas of clinical practice and/or technologies that are widely available or new to the practice community. Topics chosen for coverage by ECDs are so designed because the evidence base, the experience with technology, and/or the clinical practice are not considered sufficiently well developed to be evaluated by the formal American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) practice guidelines process. Often the topic is the subject of ongoing investigation. Thus, the reader should view ECDs as the best attempt of the ACCF and other cosponsors to inform and guide clinical practice in areas where rigorous evidence may not be available or the evidence to date is not widely accepted. When feasible, ECDs include indications or contraindications. Topics covered by ECDs may be addressed subsequently by the ACC/AHA Practice Guidelines Committee as new evidence evolves and is evaluated.
The Task Force on ECDs makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest that might arise as a result of an outside relationship or personal interest of a member of the writing panel. Specifically, all members of the writing panel are asked to provide disclosure statements of all such relationships that might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest to inform the writing effort. These statements are reviewed by the parent task force, reported orally to all members of the writing panel at the first meeting, and updated as changes occur. The relationships with industry information for writing committee members and peer reviewers are listed in Appendixes 1 and 2, respectively.
Robert A. Harrington, M.D., F.A.C.C., Chair, ACCF Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents