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 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 worldwideGuideline 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]
|Anno di pubblicazione:||2008|
|Titolo:||GRADE : An Emerging Consensus on Rating Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations|
|Autori:||Guyatt G H; Oxman A; Vist G E; Kunz R; Falck-Ytter Y; Alonso-Coello P; Schunemann H J; Liberati A; - Grade Working Group|
|Appare nelle tipologie:||Articolo su rivista|
File in questo prodotto:
I documenti presenti in Iris Unimore sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Italia, salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris