Objectives: This article provides updated GRADE guidance about how authors of systematic reviews and health technology assessments and guideline developers can rate the certainty of evidence (also known as quality of the evidence or confidence in the estimates) of a body of evidence addressing test accuracy (TA) on the domains imprecision, inconsistency, publication bias, and other domains. It also provides guidance for how to present synthesized information in evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Study Design and Setting: We present guidance for rating certainty in TA in clinical and public health and review the presentation of results of a body of evidence regarding tests. Results: Supplemented by practical examples, we describe how raters of the evidence can apply the GRADE domains inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias to a body of evidence of TA studies. Conclusion: Using GRADE in Cochrane and other reviews as well as World Health Organization and other guidelines helped refining the GRADE approach for rating the certainty of a body of evidence from TA studies. Although several of the GRADE domains (e.g., imprecision and magnitude of the association) require further methodological research to help operationalize them, judgments need to be made on the basis of what is known so far.

GRADE guidelines: 21 part 2. Test accuracy: inconsistency, imprecision, publication bias, and other domains for rating the certainty of evidence and presenting it in evidence profiles and summary of findings tables / Schunemann, H. J.; Mustafa, R. A.; Brozek, J.; Steingart, K. R.; Leeflang, M.; Murad, M. H.; Bossuyt, P.; Glasziou, P.; Jaeschke, R.; Lange, S.; Meerpohl, J.; Langendam, M.; Hultcrantz, M.; Vist, G. E.; Akl, E. A.; Helfand, M.; Santesso, N.; Hooft, L.; Scholten, R.; Rosen, M.; Rutjes, A.; Crowther, M.; Muti, P.; Raatz, H.; Ansari, M. T.; Williams, J.; Kunz, R.; Harris, J.; Rodriguez, I. A.; Kohli, M.; Guyatt, G. H.. - In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY. - ISSN 0895-4356. - 122:(2020), pp. 142-152. [10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.021]

GRADE guidelines: 21 part 2. Test accuracy: inconsistency, imprecision, publication bias, and other domains for rating the certainty of evidence and presenting it in evidence profiles and summary of findings tables

Rutjes A.;
2020

Abstract

Objectives: This article provides updated GRADE guidance about how authors of systematic reviews and health technology assessments and guideline developers can rate the certainty of evidence (also known as quality of the evidence or confidence in the estimates) of a body of evidence addressing test accuracy (TA) on the domains imprecision, inconsistency, publication bias, and other domains. It also provides guidance for how to present synthesized information in evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Study Design and Setting: We present guidance for rating certainty in TA in clinical and public health and review the presentation of results of a body of evidence regarding tests. Results: Supplemented by practical examples, we describe how raters of the evidence can apply the GRADE domains inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias to a body of evidence of TA studies. Conclusion: Using GRADE in Cochrane and other reviews as well as World Health Organization and other guidelines helped refining the GRADE approach for rating the certainty of a body of evidence from TA studies. Although several of the GRADE domains (e.g., imprecision and magnitude of the association) require further methodological research to help operationalize them, judgments need to be made on the basis of what is known so far.
2020
122
142
152
GRADE guidelines: 21 part 2. Test accuracy: inconsistency, imprecision, publication bias, and other domains for rating the certainty of evidence and presenting it in evidence profiles and summary of findings tables / Schunemann, H. J.; Mustafa, R. A.; Brozek, J.; Steingart, K. R.; Leeflang, M.; Murad, M. H.; Bossuyt, P.; Glasziou, P.; Jaeschke, R.; Lange, S.; Meerpohl, J.; Langendam, M.; Hultcrantz, M.; Vist, G. E.; Akl, E. A.; Helfand, M.; Santesso, N.; Hooft, L.; Scholten, R.; Rosen, M.; Rutjes, A.; Crowther, M.; Muti, P.; Raatz, H.; Ansari, M. T.; Williams, J.; Kunz, R.; Harris, J.; Rodriguez, I. A.; Kohli, M.; Guyatt, G. H.. - In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY. - ISSN 0895-4356. - 122:(2020), pp. 142-152. [10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.12.021]
Schunemann, H. J.; Mustafa, R. A.; Brozek, J.; Steingart, K. R.; Leeflang, M.; Murad, M. H.; Bossuyt, P.; Glasziou, P.; Jaeschke, R.; Lange, S.; Meerpohl, J.; Langendam, M.; Hultcrantz, M.; Vist, G. E.; Akl, E. A.; Helfand, M.; Santesso, N.; Hooft, L.; Scholten, R.; Rosen, M.; Rutjes, A.; Crowther, M.; Muti, P.; Raatz, H.; Ansari, M. T.; Williams, J.; Kunz, R.; Harris, J.; Rodriguez, I. A.; Kohli, M.; Guyatt, G. H.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/1296691
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 76
  • Scopus 144
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 124
social impact