<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><xml><records><record><source-app name="HighWire" version="7.x">Drupal-HighWire</source-app><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Grimshaw, G M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Khunti, K</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Baker, R</style></author></authors><secondary-authors></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Diagnosis of heart failure in primary care: an assessment of international guidelines.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">British Journal of General Practice</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2001</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2001-05-01 00:00:00</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pages><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">384-386</style></pages><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">51</style></volume><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">466</style></issue><abstract><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">An appraisal of published, peer-reviewed guidelines, in terms of their development methodologies and clinical effectiveness, was undertaken using a published and validated appraisal tool. Electronic databases revealed 13 guidelines on heart failure but only seven of these referred to diagnosis. The quality of the published guidelines was variable but there was consensus over the main symptoms and diagnostic tests, although only two symptoms were mentioned in all guidelines. Only two guidelines scored greater than 50% for rigour of development.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>