An emerging consensus on grading recommendations?
Clinical practice guidelines have improved in quality over the past 10 years by adhering to a few basic principles, such as conducting thorough systematic reviews of relevant evidence and grading the recommendations and the quality of the underlying evidence. The large number of systems of measuring the quality of evidence and recommendations that have emerged are, however, confusing (1).
The mission of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) working group is to help resolve the confusion among the different systems of rating evidence and recommendations. The group has wide representation from many organizations, including the Agency …
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Schunemann HJ, Best D, Vist G, Oxman AD. Letters, numbers, symbols and words: how to communicate grades of evidence and recommendations. CMAJ. 2003;169:677-80. [PMID: 14517128]
2.
Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328:1490. [PMID: 15205295]
3.
Guyatt GG, Bauman M, Adrizzo-Harris D, et al. Grading strength of recommendations and quality of evidence in clinical guidelines. Chest. 2005. In press.
4.
Devereaux PJ, Choi PT, Lacchetti C, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing mortality rates of private for-profit and private not-for-profit hospitals. CMAJ. 2002;166:1399-406. [PMID: 12054406]
5.
Charles C, Whelan T, Gafni A. What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment? BMJ. 1999;319:780-2. [PMID: 10488014]
6.
CAPRIE Steering Committee. A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE). Lancet. 1996;348:1329-39. [PMID: 8918275]
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
ACP Journal Club
Volume 144 • Number 1 • January 1, 2006
Pages: A8
Editors: Gordon Guyatt, MSc, MD, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (G.G.), Gunn Vist, PhD, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway (G.V.), Yngve Falck-Ytter, MD, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA (Y.F.), Regina Kunz, MD, MSc, PhD, Institute for Clinical Epidemiology, Basel, Switzerland (R.K.), Nicola Magrini, MD, Centre for Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Health Care, Modena, Italy (N.M.), and Holger Schunemann, MD, PhD, McMaster University and Italian National Cancer Institute Regina Elena, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada and Rome, Italy (H.S.)
History
Published in issue: January 1, 2006
Published online: 9 March 2020
Keywords
- Atrial fibrillation
- Cohort studies
- Confidence intervals
- Drugs
- Enzymes
- Global health
- Health care quality
- Health services research
- Hip
- Hormone replacement therapy
- Myocardial infarction
- Observational studies
- Osteoarthritis
- Prevention, policy, and public health
- Research quality assessment
- Systematic reviews
- Thorax
- Treatment guidelines
- Urology
Copyright
© 2006 American College of Physicians.
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
View More
Login Options:
Purchase
You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.
Access to EPUBs and PDFs for FREE Annals content requires users to be registered and logged in. A subscription is not required. You can create a free account below or from the following link. You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals. If you are accessing the Free Annals content via your institution's access, registration is not required.
Create your Free Account
You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals.
Submit a Comment
Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest. Comments are moderated. Please see our information for authorsregarding comments on an Annals publication.