Skip to main content

Table 4 Key informant interview sample questions

From: An approach to addressing subpopulation considerations in systematic reviews: the experience of reviewers supporting the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Are there important advances in research or clinical thinking since [insert year of previous review] that would suggest looking at the same (e.g., age, sex, risk-defined) and/or other specific subpopulations (e.g., race/ethnicity, co-morbidities, co-interventions)? Which subpopulations are most important?
 What streams of evidence since [insert year of previous review] support your perspective?
  Are there key studies we should be aware of in formulating our approach to subpopulations?
Greater benefits from screening can occur in those who are more likely to be undiagnosed, and from intervention in those at higher risk.
 Does under-diagnosis vary by age, sex, race/ethnicity or other characteristics? Does absolute risk vary by age, sex, race/ethnicity or other characteristics?
  For which subpopulation(s) would benefit from screening and intervention be substantially greater than “average”? Why?
Lesser benefits from screening and intervention can occur in those with competing risks, health states, or limited life expectancy, which reduce the likelihood of benefit from successful intervention or affect the ability to accurately screen for this condition.
 Are there subpopulations that might be substantially less likely to benefit from detection and intervention? Why?
 Do the values that patients place on important outcomes (benefits or harms) associated with this topic differ by age, sex, race/ethnicity or other characteristics? Please be specific.
 Based on your answers to these questions, which subpopulations differ substantially enough in the likelihood of benefits (and/or risk of harms) from screening and intervention of [insert topic] that they may warrant different clinical preventive recommendations?
  What criteria would you use to define these clinically relevant subpopulations?
  Should this topic be scoped to specifically include a high-risk approach in addition to (or instead of) a general population approach?
What are the validated risk assessment tools that are applicable to this topic?
  Are some of the tools better than others for framing a potential high-risk approach to [insert topic]?
  Do any tools vary in their applicability to specific subpopulations based on age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidities, or other factors?
 Is the epidemiological information below [paste data below this question] that we have located to frame this topic complete, current, and representative of the issues for subpopulations in [insert topic] (i.e., Do the data adequately capture the extent to which death or morbidity from [insert condition(s)] differ by age, sex, race/ethnicity, or other clinical characteristics?)?
  Are there other data sources we should use to frame this topic?