This document provides information on the five types of written products developed under the auspices of the AUA.

Download Definition Statement PDF

CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE (CPG)

Definition
Strong, moderate, or conditional recommendations based on available scientific evidence with consideration for balance of risks/benefits; further information provided in the form of Clinical Principle or Expert Opinion statements where gaps in the evidence exist.

Level of Evidence
Systematic reviews; RCTs supplemented with lower-level evidence and expert consensus when available high-quality evidence is lacking

Composition of Development Group
Multidisciplinary subject matter experts, including patients/patient advocates, as appropriate

External Review
Extensive review process to include all stakeholders, relevant approval bodies (Practice Guidelines Committee (PGC), Science & Quality Council (S&Q), Board of Directors (BOD)), and public comment 

Review Cycle
24-36 months or on an ad hoc basis as determined by the PGC

Document Sunsetting
10 years or as determined by the PGC

Example Document
Advanced Prostate Cancer

QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ISSUE BRIEF (QIIB)

Definition
Qualitative assessments on quality or patient safety topics in urology—these may provide a brief explanation of an available technology; summarize an AUA-sponsored conference, congress, symposium, or other meeting; discuss case studies in QI; and/or discuss a particular theoretical or practical approach in quality, safety, and/or measurement.

Level of Evidence
Expert opinion supported by available literature

Composition of Development Group
Subject matter experts in the topic area

External Review
Review by relevant stakeholders and approval bodies (Quality Improvement & Patient Safety Committee (QIPS), Science & Quality Council (S&Q), Board of Directors (BOD)), and public comment (except meeting summaries)

Review Cycle
Every two years, or on an ad hoc basis, as determined by the QIPS Committee

Document Sunsetting
10 years or as determined by S&Q and/or QIPS

Example Document
2016 Quality Summit Proceedings: Shared Decision Making

CLINICAL CONSENSUS STATEMENT (CCS)

Definition
Statements of expert opinion for which there may or may not be supporting evidence available in the medical literature.

Level of Evidence
Expert opinion supported by available literature

Composition of Development Group
Subject matter experts and others with interest in topic area

External Review
Review by relevant stakeholders and approval bodies (Quality Improvement & Patient Safety Committee (QIPS), Science & Quality Council (S&Q), Board of Directors (BOD)), and public comment

Review Cycle
Every two years, or on an ad hoc basis, as determined by the QIPS Committee

Document Sunsetting
10 years or as determined by S&Q and/or QIPS

Example Document
Urologic Procedures and Antimicrobial Prophylaxis

POLICY STATEMENT

Definition
A straightforward declaration of the organization’s stance on issues of public policy affecting the membership, the profession of urology, or the AUA. These statements are typically comprehensive, include policy solutions or recommendations, and are based on policy analysis. Many of them provide background information for a more complete understanding of the issue and the rationale behind the policy statement. 

Level of Evidence
Expert opinion which may be supported by data or other literature

Composition of Development Group
Subject matter experts in the topic area

External Review
Review by relevant stakeholders and approval bodies (Public Policy Council (PPC), Board of Directors (BOD))

Review Cycle
Every two years or as needed if current events or new research warrant prompt revision

Document Sunsetting
As determined by the PPC

Example Document
Telemedicine

POSITION STATEMENT

Definition
A straightforward declaration on a particular topic related to a urologic or general concern not covered by a clinical guidance document or policy statement. These statements are short in nature and contain declarations of agreement or disagreement regarding a current situation or norm. The Position Statement can be an effective tool when a quick and united organizational stance is needed on an issue or when the organization is trying to call attention to an issue or perspective. Position statements tend to be values-based and are used sparingly by the AUA. As noted in our Neutrality Statement, “the AUA starts from a place of neutrality unless an issue can be unequivocally tied to AUA’s mission, vision, core values, and pillars.” The AUA membership is diverse and complex and we keep that front and center when considering issuing Position Statements.

Level of Evidence
Expert opinion

Composition of Development Group
Subject matter experts in the topic area

External Review
Review by relevant stakeholders and approval bodies (Board of Directors (BOD) and relevant key leadership)

Review Cycle
Every two years or as needed if current events or new research warrant prompt revision

Document Sunsetting
As determined by BOD

Example Document
Affirmative Action