Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Top Cited Papers
- 17 June 2004
- Vol. 328 (7454) , 1490
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490
Abstract
Users of clinical practice guidelines and other recommendations need to know how much confidence they can place in the recommendations. Systematic and explicit methods of making judgments can reduce errors and improve communication. We have developed a system for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations that can be applied across a wide range of interventions and contexts. In this article we present a summary of our approach from the perspective of a guideline user. Judgments about the strength of a recommendation require consideration of the balance between benefits and harms, the quality of the evidence, translation of the evidence into specific circumstances, and the certainty of the baseline risk. It is also important to consider costs (resource utilisation) before making a recommendation. Inconsistencies among systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations reduce their potential to facilitate critical appraisal and improve communication of these judgments. Our system for guiding these complex judgments balances the need for simplicity with the need for full and transparent consideration of all important issues. Clinical guidelines are only as good as the evidence and judgments they are based on. The GRADE approach aims to make it easier for users to assess the judgments behind recommendationsKeywords
This publication has 33 references indexed in Scilit:
- Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analysesBMJ, 2003
- Risks and Benefits of Estrogen Plus Progestin in Healthy Postmenopausal Women: Principal Results From the Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled TrialJAMA, 2002
- The evolving role of prevention in health care: Contributions of the U.S. Preventive Services Task ForceAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2001
- Current methods of the U.S. Preventive Services Task ForceAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2001
- Developing an evidence-based guide to community preventive services—methods11Some of this material has been previously published in: Shefer A, Briss P, Rodewald L, et al. Improving immunization coverage rates: An evidence-based review of the literature. Epidemiologic Reviews 1999;20:96–142.22The names and affiliations of the Task Force members are listed on page v of this supplement and at http://www.thecommunityguide.orgAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2000
- Helmets for preventing head and facial injuries in bicyclistsCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 1999
- Randomized Trial of Estrogen Plus Progestin for Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in Postmenopausal WomenJAMA, 1998
- Users' guides to the medical literature. IX. A method for grading health care recommendations. Evidence-Based Medicine Working GroupJAMA, 1995
- Effect of Fluoride Treatment on the Fracture Rate in Postmenopausal Women with OsteoporosisNew England Journal of Medicine, 1990
- Pertinency of an extraneous variableJournal of Chronic Diseases, 1967