The data presented in this Data in Brief article offers an insight into the scientific literature on conceptual and empirical approaches to public participation and consensus-building. It consists of articles retrieved from the Scopus search engine which feature \"public participation\", \"consensus\", and \"value and attribute\" in the title, abstract, and author keywords. Information on the bibliography is recorded, namely title, author(s), year of publication, and source title. Metadata on how the articles were analyzed is provided in the dataset. From 121 publications, most literature (103) analyzes public participation through case studies. The studies were analyzed according to factors that were identified inductively and grouped in two categories: 1) public participation: actor, method, and level of public participation, and 2) consensus: approaches, conflict. The data is related to the research article entitled \"Public participation and consensus-building in urban planning from the lens of heritage planning: A systematic literature review\". This paper focuses on the public participation factors as the factors on consensus are already explained in the main article. This paper shows which factors of participation were implemented in the analyzed studies. Given that, this article contributes to researchers and practitioners working on public participation because it reveals the diversity of approaches for consensus-building in public participation processes, which help them realize which level of participation they want to achieve and the means to reach it.

HealthyHearts NYC was a stepped wedge randomized control trial that tested the effectiveness of practice facilitation on the adoption of cardiovascular disease guidelines in small primary care practices. The objective of this study was to identify was to identify attributes of small practices that signaled they would perform well in a practice facilitation intervention implementation.
A mixed methods multiple-case study design was used. Six small practices were selected representing 3 variations in meeting the practice-level benchmark of >70% of hypertensive patients having controlled blood pressure. Inductive and deductive approaches were used to identify themes and assign case ratings. Cross-case rating comparison was used to identify attributes of high performing practices.
Our first key finding is that the high-performing and improved practices in our study looked and acted similarly during the intervention implementation. The second key finding is that 3 attributes emerged in our analysis of determinants of high performance in small practices: (1) advanced use of the EHR; (2) dedicated resources and commitment to quality improvement; and (3) actively engaged lead clinician and office manager.
These attributes may be important determinants of high performance, indicating not only a small practice\'s capability to engage in an intervention but possibly also its readiness to change. We recommend developing tools to assess readiness to change, specifically for small primary care practices, which may help external agents, like practice facilitators, better translate intervention implementations to context.

BACKGROUND: Methods on developing new (de novo) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have received substantial attention. However, research into alternative methods of CPG development using existing CPG documents (CPG adaptation) - a specific issue for guideline development groups in low- and middle-income countries - is sparse. There are only a few examples showcasing the pragmatic application of such alternative approaches in settings with time and budget constraints, especially in the prehospital setting. This paper aims to describe and strengthen the methods of developing prehospital CPGs using alternative guideline development methods through a case study design.
METHODS: We qualitatively explored a CPG development project conducted in 2016 for prehospital providers in South Africa as a case study. Key stakeholders, involved in various processes of the guideline project, were purposefully sampled. Data were collected from one focus group and six in-depth interviews and analysed using thematic analysis. Overarching themes and sub-themes were inductively developed and categorised as challenges and recommendations and further transformed into action points.
RESULTS: Key challenges revolved around guideline implementation as opposed to development. These included the unavoidable effect of interest and beliefs on implementing recommendations, the local evidence void, a shifting implementation context, and opposing end-user needs. Guideline development and implementation strengthening priority actions included: i) developing a national end-user document; ii) aligning recommendations with local practice; iii) communicating a clear and consistent message; iv) addressing controversial recommendations; v) managing the impact of interests, beliefs and intellectual conflicts; and vi) transparently reporting implementation decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: The cornerstone of a successful guideline development process is the translation and implementation of CPG recommendations into clinical practice. We highlight key priority actions for prehospital guideline development teams with limited resources to strengthen guideline development, dissemination, and implementation by drawing from lessons learnt from a prehospital guideline project conducted in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Well-written and transparent case reports (1) reveal early signals of potential benefits, harms, and information on the use of resources; (2) provide information for clinical research and clinical practice guidelines, and (3) inform medical education. High-quality case reports are more likely when authors follow reporting guidelines. During 2011-2012, a group of clinicians, researchers, and journal editors developed recommendations for the accurate reporting of information in case reports that resulted in the CARE (CAse REport) Statement and Checklist. They were presented at the 2013 International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, have been endorsed by multiple medical journals, and translated into nine languages.
OBJECTIVE: This explanation and elaboration document has the objective to increase the use and dissemination of the CARE Checklist in writing and publishing case reports.
UNASSIGNED: Each item from the CARE Checklist is explained and accompanied by published examples. The explanations and examples in this document are designed to support the writing of high-quality case reports by authors and their critical appraisal by editors, peer reviewers, and readers.
CONCLUSIONS: This article and the 2013 CARE Statement and Checklist, available from the CARE website [www.care-statement.org] and the EQUATOR Network [www.equator-network.org], are resources for improving the completeness and transparency of case reports.

Case reports provide the foundation of practice-based evidence for therapeutic massage and bodywork (TMB), as well as many other health-related fields. To improve the consistency of information contained in case reports, the CARE (CAse REport) Group developed and published a set of guidelines for the medical community to facilitate systematic data collection (http://www.care-statement.org/#). Because of the differences between the practice of medicine and TMB, modifying some sections of the CARE guidelines is necessary to make them compatible with TMB case reports. Accordingly, the objectives of this article are to present the CARE guidelines, apply each section of the guidelines to TMB practice and reporting with suggested adaptations, and highlight concerns, new ideas, and other resources for potential authors of TMB case reports. The primary sections of the CARE guidelines adapted for TMB case reports are diagnostic assessment, follow-up and outcomes, and therapeutic intervention. Specifically, because diagnosis falls outside of the scope of most TMB practitioners, suggestions are made as to how diagnoses made by other health care providers should be included in the context of a TMB case report. Additionally, two new aspects of the case presentation section are recommended: a) assessment measures, which outline and describe the outcome measures on which the case report will focus, and b) a description of the TMB provider (i.e., scope of practice, practice environment, experience level, training, credentialing, and/or expertise) as part of the intervention description. This article culminates with practical resources for TMB practitioners writing case reports, including a TMB Case Report Template-a single document that TMB practitioners can use to guide his or her process of writing a case report. Once the template is adopted by authors of TMB case reports, future efforts can explore the impact on the quality and quantity of case reports and how they impact TMB practice, research, education and, ultimately, the clients.

Many diseases and health risks are the result of unhealthy lifestyles and technology could be used as an intervention. However, designing healthy lifestyle technologies is challenging, as the technology should be able to influence user behavior. In this case study, the design and evaluation process of a persuasive healthy lifestyle assistance technology was investigated. The iterative design and evaluation process included: contextual inquiry, storyboarding, concept generation, paper prototyping, video prototyping, interactive prototyping and user testing. Several design challenges are identified and guidelines are described for designing a technological intervention to encourage healthy lifestyles.

BACKGROUND: A case report is a narrative that describes, for medical, scientific, or educational purposes, a medical problem experienced by one or more patients. Case reports written without guidance from reporting standards are insufficiently rigorous to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design.
OBJECTIVE: Develop, disseminate, and implement systematic reporting guidelines for case reports.
METHODS: We used a three-phase consensus process consisting of (1) premeeting literature review and interviews to generate items for the reporting guidelines, (2) a face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the reporting guidelines, and (3) postmeeting feedback, review, and pilot testing, followed by finalization of the case report guidelines.
RESULTS: This consensus process involved 27 participants and resulted in a 13-item checklist-a reporting guideline for case reports. The primary items of the checklist are title, key words, abstract, introduction, patient information, clinical findings, timeline, diagnostic assessment, therapeutic interventions, follow-up and outcomes, discussion, patient perspective, and informed consent.
CONCLUSIONS: We believe the implementation of the CARE (CAse REport) guidelines by medical journals will improve the completeness and transparency of published case reports and that the systematic aggregation of information from case reports will inform clinical study design, provide early signals of effectiveness and harms, and improve healthcare delivery.
背景：病例报告是一种出于医疗、科学或教育目的，而对一名或多名患者所遇到的医疗问题进行描述的记叙文。在无报告标准指导的情况下编写的案例报告是不够严谨的，无法指导临床实践或报告临床研究设计。主要目标：制定、传播和推行适用于病例报告的系统性报告指引。方法：我们采用的是一个由三个阶段组成的共识形成过程，其中包括(1) 在会议之前审核文字材料并进行口头审查，以生成适用于报告指引的条目，(2)召开面对面的共识会议，起草报告指引，和 (3)在会议之后进行反馈、审核和试点测试，然后完成病例报告指引。结果：此共识形成过程涉及 27 名参与者并产生了一个包含 13 个条目的清单－案例报告的报告指引。该清单的主要条目有标题、关键字、摘要、简介、患者信息、临床发现、时间表、诊断评估、治疗干预、随访和结果、讨论、患者观点和知情同意书。
Un informe de caso es una narración que describe, con un objetivo médico, científico o educativo, un problema médico experimentado por uno o más pacientes. Los informes de caso redactados sin la orientación de normas de elaboración de informes no son suficientemente rigurosos para guiar la práctica clínica ni para servir de base en el diseño de los estudios clínicos.
Desarrollar, difundir e implementar pautas sistemáticas de elaboración de informes para los informes de caso.
Hemos utilizado un proceso de consenso de tres fases consistente en (1) antes de la reunión, revisión de la bibliografía y entrevistas para crear elementos para las pautas de elaboración de informes, (2) reunión de consenso en persona para elaborar un borrador de las pautas de elaboración de informes, y (3) después de la reunión, recogida de opiniones, revisión y pruebas piloto, y, a continuación, redacción definitiva de las pautas de elaboración de informes.
En este proceso de consenso intervinieron 27 participantes y dio como resultado una lista de comprobación de 13 elementos—una guía para la elaboración de informes aplicable a los informes de caso. Los principales elementos de la lista de comprobación son el título, las palabras clave, el resumen, la introducción, la información al paciente, los hallazgos clínicos, el calendario, la evaluación diagnóstica, las intervenciones terapéuticas, el seguimiento y los resultados, la discusión, la perspectiva del paciente y el consentimiento informado.
Creemos que la implementación de las pautas CARE (de CAse REport o informe de caso) por las revistas médicas mejorará la exhaustividad y transparencia de los informes de caso publicados, y que la agregación sistemática de los datos procedentes de informes de caso servirá de base para el diseño de los estudios clínicos, proporcionará las primeras señales de efectividad y daños, y mejorará la prestación de servicios médicos.

BACKGROUND: A case report is a narrative that describes, for medical, scientific, or educational purposes, a medical problem experienced by one or more patients. Case reports written without guidance from reporting standards are insufficiently rigorous to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design.
OBJECTIVE: Develop, disseminate, and implement systematic reporting guidelines for case reports.
METHODS: We used a three-phase consensus process consisting of (1) pre-meeting literature review and interviews to generate items for the reporting guidelines, (2) a face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the reporting guidelines, and (3) post-meeting feedback, review, and pilot testing, followed by finalization of the case report guidelines.
RESULTS: This consensus process involved 27 participants and resulted in a 13-item checklist-a reporting guideline for case reports. The primary items of the checklist are title, key words, abstract, introduction, patient information, clinical findings, timeline, diagnostic assessment, therapeutic interventions, follow-up and outcomes, discussion, patient perspective, and informed consent.
CONCLUSIONS: We believe the implementation of the CARE (CAse REport) guidelines by medical journals will improve the completeness and transparency of published case reports and that the systematic aggregation of information from case reports will inform clinical study design, provide early signals of effectiveness and harms, and improve healthcare delivery.

BACKGROUND: A case report is a narrative that describes, for medical, scientific, or educational purposes, a medical problem experienced by one or more patients. Case reports written without guidance from reporting standards are insufficiently rigorous to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design.
OBJECTIVE: Develop, disseminate, and implement systematic reporting guidelines for case reports.
METHODS: We used a three-phase consensus process consisting of (1) pre-meeting literature review and interviews to generate items for the reporting guidelines, (2) a face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the reporting guidelines, and (3) post-meeting feedback, review, and pilot testing, followed by finalization of the case report guidelines.
RESULTS: This consensus process involved 27 participants and resulted in a 13-item checklist-a reporting guideline for case reports. The primary items of the checklist are title, key words, abstract, introduction, patient information, clinical findings, timeline, diagnostic assessment, therapeutic interventions, follow-up and outcomes, discussion, patient perspective, and informed consent.
CONCLUSIONS: We believe the implementation of the CARE (CAse REport) guidelines by medical journals will improve the completeness and transparency of published case reports and that the systematic aggregation of information from case reports will inform clinical study design, provide early signals of effectiveness and harms, and improve healthcare delivery.