Evidence-Based Clinical Algorithm for Hypotonia Assessment: To Pardon the Errs

Table 1

Description of changes made to the initial prototype of the EBCA.

Description of inclusions in technical report & revised algorithm
Purpose
Overall objective
Health Intent	Clinical assessment of hypotonia in children
Expected benefit	More accurate assessment of Hypotonia, with the inclusion of evidenced-based clinical characteristics and methods
Target population
Age and gender	0–5 years, male and female
Clinical condition	Suspected hypotonia in any genetic, neurological or other conditions
Severity & stage	Variable: initial clinical assessment for diagnostic purposes or assessment/reassessment for interventions
Health question
Intervention	Assessment
Outcome	Comprehensive approach to clinical assessment
Health context	Acute and specialised centres, hospital and rehabilitation setting, primary health care clinics or community care centres, special school settings, etc.
Stakeholder involvement
Intended Users	Health practitioners involved in the initial clinical assessment of hypotonia in children for diagnostic and intervention purposes. The intended users of the algorithm and report include occupational therapists; paediatricians and physiotherapists
Stakeholders involved in development	Given that the population that is to benefit from this clinical algorithm includes children between 0–5 years, who are unable to contribute to the study, opinions were limited to the practitioners that are responsible for the assessment of this target group. Hence, samples involved in the various stages in the development of the algorithm are the same homogenous population for whom the algorithm has been developed; hence it is modelled on the practice experiences of occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and paediatricians
Strategies and methods used to; capture views and preferences	Evidence from literature [24]; Cross-sectional survey with Clinicians [25]; Two-round Delphi Consensus Process with experts [26]; Multiple focus groups () with clinicians [27]
Development process
Systematic methods used to search for Evidence	Evidence from literature [24]; Cross-sectional survey with clinicians [25]; Two-round Delphi Consensus Process with experts [26]; Multiple focus groups () with clinicians [27]
Strengths and limitations of body; of evidence	The strengths and limitations of the initial systematic review has been documented [24]. The processes of data collection which has contributed to the final EBCA has been explicitly stated in each of the stages
Link between recommendations; and supporting evidence	The initial prototype of the EBCA included a description of how the data collected from the preceding phases were processed and used in its development [27]