Scientific Publications: Approval Processes

The following types of scientific publications produced by the American Heart Association are rigorously reviewed before approval and publication.

Guidelines provide systematically developed evidence-based recommendations to assist practitioner and patient decisions about appropriate health care for specific clinical circumstances. Developed after a significant body of studies have accumulated, which include randomized trials, but may also include well designed cohort registries, meta-analyses and expert consensus. Guidelines undergo peer review and require Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee (SACC) approval with final approval by the Executive Committee.

Scientific Statements increase knowledge and awareness by healthcare professionals of effective, state-of-the art science related to the causes, prevention, detection, or management of cardiovascular diseases and stroke. Represent the consensus of the leading experts in cardiovascular disease and stroke. Scientific Statements undergo peer review and require SACC approval with final approval by the Executive Committee.

Science Advisories provide rapid and clear positioning on specific and focused scientific issues. Advisories are statements on an evolving, prominent scientific issue of great interest to the public and to health professionals. Science Advisories undergo peer review and require SACC approval with final approval by the Executive Committee.

Presidential Advisories are important papers initiated by the association’s medical officers. Presidential Advisories undergo SACC approval and final approval by the Executive Committee.

Policy Statements reflect the work of expert panel working groups that are convened to study timely issues such as quality health care, disease management, and other specific topics as appropriate and issue recommendations/considerations for clinical and public policy. They require peer review, approval by the Advocacy Coordinating Committee, SACC review, and approval by the Executive Committee.

Clinical Data Standards compare clinical outcomes between various trials and registries and to facilitate data management in future trials and registries by defining standards and outcomes. Clinical Data Standards undergo peer review and require SACC approval with final approval by the Executive Committee.

Performance Measures are derived from practice guidelines and are intended to provide practitioners with tools for measuring the quality of care they provide, by defining specific, measurable elements of care. Performance Measures undergo peer review and require SACC approval with final approval by the Executive Committee.

Clinical Competence and Training Statements address summative knowledge and experience of specific types of physicians and/or training programs. Evidence-based, and when evidence is not available, expert opinion is used to formulate recommendations. Indications and contraindications for specific services or procedures are not included in the scope of these documents. Clinical Competence and Training Statements undergo peer review and require SACC approval with final approval by the Executive Committee.