BMJ  2008;336:924-926 (26 April), doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD

Analysis

Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations

GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations

¹ Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada L8N 3Z5, ² Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, PO Box 7004, St Olavs Plass, 0130 Oslo, Norway, ³ Basel Institute of Clinical Epidemiology, University Hospital Basel, Hebelstrasse 10, 4031 Basel, Switzerland, ⁴ Division of Gastroenterology, Case Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA, ⁵ Iberoamerican Cochrane Center, Servicio de Epidemiología Clínica y Salud Pública (Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona), Hospital de Sant Pau, Barcelona 08041, Spain , ⁶ Department of Epidemiology, Italian National Cancer Institute Regina Elena, Rome, Italy

Guidelines are inconsistent in how they rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. This article explores the advantages of the GRADE system, which is increasingly being adopted by organisations worldwide

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Failure to consider the quality of evidence can lead to misguided recommendations; hormone replacement therapy for post-menopausal women provides an instructive example High quality evidence that an intervention’s desirable effects are clearly greater than its undesirable effects, or are clearly not, warrants a strong recommendation Uncertainty about the trade-offs (because of low quality evidence or because the desirable and undesirable effects are closely balanced) warrants a weak recommendation Guidelines should inform clinicians what the quality of the underlying evidence is and whether recommendations are strong or weak The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE ) approach provides a system for rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations that is explicit, comprehensive, transparent, and pragmatic and is increasingly being adopted by organisations worldwide

Guideline developers around the world are inconsistent in how they rate quality of evidence and grade strength of recommendations. As a result, guideline users face . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

David Moher, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Douglas G Altman for the PRISMA Group
BMJ 2009 339: b2535. [Full Text]

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration

Alessandro Liberati, Douglas G Altman, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Cynthia Mulrow, Peter C Gøtzsche, John P A Ioannidis, Mike Clarke, P J Devereaux, Jos Kleijnen, and David Moher
BMJ 2009 339: b2700. [Abstract] [Full Text]

Adjunctive non-invasive ways of healing bone fractures

Rudolf W Poolman
BMJ 2009 338: b11. [Extract] [Full Text]

Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive

Roman Jaeschke, Gordon H Guyatt, Phil Dellinger, Holger Schünemann, Mitchell M Levy, Regina Kunz, Susan Norris, Julian Bion for the GRADE working group
BMJ 2008 337: a744. [Extract] [Full Text]

Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies

Holger J Schünemann, Andrew D Oxman, Jan Brozek, Paul Glasziou, Roman Jaeschke, Gunn E Vist, John W Williams, Jr, Regina Kunz, Jonathan Craig, Victor M Montori, Patrick Bossuyt, Gordon H Guyatt for the GRADE Working Group
BMJ 2008 336: 1106-1110. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Going from evidence to recommendations

Gordon H Guyatt, Andrew D Oxman, Regina Kunz, Yngve Falck-Ytter, Gunn E Vist, Alessandro Liberati, Holger J Schünemann for the GRADE Working Group
BMJ 2008 336: 1049-1051. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Reduce, reuse, recycle

Trish Groves
BMJ 2008 336: 0. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Buckley, D. I., Fu, R., Freeman, M., Rogers, K., Helfand, M. (2009). C-Reactive Protein as a Risk Factor for Coronary Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. ANN INTERN MED 151: 483-495 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• de Almeida, J. R., Al Khabori, M., Guyatt, G. H., Witterick, I. J., Lin, V. Y. W., Nedzelski, J. M., Chen, J. M. (2009). Combined Corticosteroid and Antiviral Treatment for Bell Palsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA 302: 985-993 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., and the PRISMA Group, (2009). Reprint--Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. ptjournal 89: 873-880 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Guyatt, G. H., Helfand, M., Kunz, R. (2009). Comparing the USPSTF and GRADE Approaches to Recommendations. ANN INTERN MED 151: 363-363 [Full text]  
• Petitti, D. B., Teutsch, S. M., Barton, M. B., Sawaya, G. F., Ockene, J. K., DeWitt, T. (2009). Comparing the USPSTF and GRADE Approaches to Recommendations. ANN INTERN MED 151: 363-364 [Full text]  
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., the PRISMA Group, (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. ANN INTERN MED 151: 264-269 [Full text]  
• Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P.A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. ANN INTERN MED 151: W-65-W-94 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Smith, D. H., Johnson, E. S., Thorp, M. L., Petrik, A., Yang, X., Blough, D. K. (2009). Outcomes predicted by phosphorous in chronic kidney disease: a retrospective CKD-inception cohort study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 0: gfp387v1-gfp387 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G, for the PRISMA Group, (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 339: b2535-b2535 [Full text]  
• Liberati, A., Altman, D. G, Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C, Ioannidis, J. P A, Clarke, M., Devereaux, P J, Kleijnen, J., Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 339: b2700-b2700 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Hahn, D. L. (2009). Importance of Evidence Grading for Guideline Implementation: The Example of Asthma. Ann Fam Med 7: 364-369 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Annane, D., Bellissant, E., Bollaert, P.-E., Briegel, J., Confalonieri, M., De Gaudio, R., Keh, D., Kupfer, Y., Oppert, M., Meduri, G. U. (2009). Corticosteroids in the Treatment of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock in Adults: A Systematic Review. JAMA 301: 2362-2375 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Jaeschke, R., Angus, D. C. (2009). Living With Uncertainty in the Intensive Care Unit: Should Patients With Sepsis Be Treated With Steroids?. JAMA 301: 2388-2390 [Full text]  
• Vanholder, R., Abramowicz, D., Cannata-Andia, J. B., Cocchi, V., Cochat, P., Covic, A., Eckardt, K.-U., Fouque, D., Heimburger, O., Jenkins, S., MacLeod, A., Lindley, E., Locatelli, F., London, G., Marti i Monros, A., Spasovski, G., Tattersall, J., Van Biesen, W., Wanner, C., Wiecek, A., Zoccali, C. (2009). The future of European Nephrology 'Guidelines'--a declaration of intent by European Renal Best Practice (ERBP). NDT Plus 2: 213-221 [Full text]  
• Scott, P., Huss, A., Stuck, A. E., Trotter, C., Egger, M. (2009). Efficacy of pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine. CMAJ 180: 1134-1135 [Full text]  
• Howick, J., Glasziou, P., Aronson, J. K (2009). The evolution of evidence hierarchies: what can Bradford Hill's 'guidelines for causation' contribute?. JRSM 102: 186-194 [Full text]  
• Melmed, S., Colao, A., Barkan, A., Molitch, M., Grossman, A. B., Kleinberg, D., Clemmons, D., Chanson, P., Laws, E., Schlechte, J., Vance, M. L., Ho, K., Giustina, A. (2009). Guidelines for Acromegaly Management: An Update. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 94: 1509-1517 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Horvath, A. R. (2009). Grading Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations for Diagnostic Tests and Strategies. Clin. Chem. 55: 853-855 [Full text]  
• Poolman, R. W (2009). Adjunctive non-invasive ways of healing bone fractures. BMJ 338: b11-b11 [Full text]  
• Alonso-Coello, P., Lopez, A., Pencille, L. J., Montori, V. M. (2009). Is Too Much Intervention Recommended in the ACP Osteoporosis Treatment Guidelines?. ANN INTERN MED 150: 285-286 [Full text]  
• Murad, M. H., Montori, V. M., Guyatt, G. H. (2008). Incorporating Patient Preferences in Evidence-Based Medicine. JAMA 300: 2483-2483 [Full text]  
• Erstad, B. L (2008). A Primer on Critical Care Pharmacy Services. The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 42: 1871-1881 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Neumann, P. J., Kamae, M. S., Palmer, J. A. (2008). Medicare's National Coverage Decisions For Technologies, 1999-2007. Health Aff (Millwood) 27: 1620-1631 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Montori, V. M., Guyatt, G. H. (2008). Progress in Evidence-Based Medicine. JAMA 300: 1814-1816 [Full text]  
• Jaeschke, R., Guyatt, G. H, Dellinger, P., Schunemann, H., Levy, M. M, Kunz, R., Norris, S., Bion, J., for the GRADE working group, (2008). Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive. BMJ 337: a744-a744 [Full text]  

Online poll

Find out more on doc2doc >>