TY - JOUR
T1 - The GRADE Working Group clarifies the construct of certainty of evidence
AU - Hultcrantz, Monica
AU - Rind, David
AU - Akl, Elie A.
AU - Treweek, Shaun
AU - Mustafa, Reem A.
AU - Iorio, Alfonso
AU - Alper, Brian S.
AU - Meerpohl, Joerg J.
AU - Murad, M. Hassan
AU - Ansari, Mohammed T.
AU - Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal
AU - Östlund, Pernilla
AU - Tranæus, Sofia
AU - Christensen, Robin
AU - Gartlehner, Gerald
AU - Brozek, Jan
AU - Izcovich, Ariel
AU - Schünemann, Holger
AU - Guyatt, Gordon
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding: The Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, receives core funding from the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates. The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, is supported by a core grant from the Oak Foundation (OCAY-13-309). S.V.K. is funded by an NRS Scottish Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12017/13 and MC_UU_12017/15), and Chief Scientist's Office (SPHSU13 and SPHSU15).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The Authors
PY - 2017/7
Y1 - 2017/7
N2 - Objective To clarify the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) definition of certainty of evidence and suggest possible approaches to rating certainty of the evidence for systematic reviews, health technology assessments, and guidelines. Study Design and Setting This work was carried out by a project group within the GRADE Working Group, through brainstorming and iterative refinement of ideas, using input from workshops, presentations, and discussions at GRADE Working Group meetings to produce this document, which constitutes official GRADE guidance. Results Certainty of evidence is best considered as the certainty that a true effect lies on one side of a specified threshold or within a chosen range. We define possible approaches for choosing threshold or range. For guidelines, what we call a fully contextualized approach requires simultaneously considering all critical outcomes and their relative value. Less-contextualized approaches, more appropriate for systematic reviews and health technology assessments, include using specified ranges of magnitude of effect, for example, ranges of what we might consider no effect, trivial, small, moderate, or large effects. Conclusion It is desirable for systematic review authors, guideline panelists, and health technology assessors to specify the threshold or ranges they are using when rating the certainty in evidence.
AB - Objective To clarify the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) definition of certainty of evidence and suggest possible approaches to rating certainty of the evidence for systematic reviews, health technology assessments, and guidelines. Study Design and Setting This work was carried out by a project group within the GRADE Working Group, through brainstorming and iterative refinement of ideas, using input from workshops, presentations, and discussions at GRADE Working Group meetings to produce this document, which constitutes official GRADE guidance. Results Certainty of evidence is best considered as the certainty that a true effect lies on one side of a specified threshold or within a chosen range. We define possible approaches for choosing threshold or range. For guidelines, what we call a fully contextualized approach requires simultaneously considering all critical outcomes and their relative value. Less-contextualized approaches, more appropriate for systematic reviews and health technology assessments, include using specified ranges of magnitude of effect, for example, ranges of what we might consider no effect, trivial, small, moderate, or large effects. Conclusion It is desirable for systematic review authors, guideline panelists, and health technology assessors to specify the threshold or ranges they are using when rating the certainty in evidence.
KW - Certainty of evidence
KW - GRADE
KW - Guidelines
KW - Health technology assessment
KW - Systematic reviews
KW - Thresholds
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021065825&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021065825&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.006
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.006
M3 - Article
C2 - 28529184
AN - SCOPUS:85021065825
SN - 0895-4356
VL - 87
SP - 4
EP - 13
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
ER -