Literature DB >> 11143209

A practical approach to evidence grading.

N Greer1, G Mosser, G Logan, G W Halaas.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI) is a collaboration of 17 Minnesota medical groups. Among other activities, ICSI develops health care guidelines and technology assessment reports. To maintain focus on the underlying evidence, ICSI has developed an evidence and conclusion grading system for use by the practicing clinicians who write the documents and use them in making decisions about patient care. THE EVIDENCE GRADING SYSTEM IN DETAIL: The centerpiece of the evidence grading system is the conclusion grading worksheet, which calls for statement of a conclusion, summarization of research reports that support or dispute the conclusion, assignment of classes and quality markers to the research reports, and assignment of a grade to the conclusion. EXPERIENCE AND
RESULTS: The system has been used in the writing of more than 40 guidelines and numerous technology assessment reports. An example of a worksheet from the congestive heart failure guideline is presented. The system has helped the drafting groups to attend to the evidence. The methods have proven to be well accepted by practicing physicians and to be practical, although staff expertise in epidemiology is needed to support the system. Grading of conclusions appears to be reliable, although this characteristic of the system has not been rigorously tested. The outputs are valued by users of the documents. DISCUSSION: Although some residual problems remain to be solved, the system appears to be successful in overcoming the complexity of some published systems for grading evidence while still yielding a defensible classification of conclusions based on the strength of the underlying evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11143209     DOI: 10.1016/s1070-3241(00)26059-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Improv        ISSN: 1070-3241


  10 in total

1.  Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

Authors:  David Atkins; Dana Best; Peter A Briss; Martin Eccles; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Signe Flottorp; Gordon H Guyatt; Robin T Harbour; Margaret C Haugh; David Henry; Suzanne Hill; Roman Jaeschke; Gillian Leng; Alessandro Liberati; Nicola Magrini; James Mason; Philippa Middleton; Jacek Mrukowicz; Dianne O'Connell; Andrew D Oxman; Bob Phillips; Holger J Schünemann; Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer; Helena Varonen; Gunn E Vist; John W Williams; Stephanie Zaza
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-06-19

2.  Increasing the efficiency of medical research article searching for the public and experts by "shepardizing": a lesson from legal research databases.

Authors:  Perry W Payne
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2013-07

Review 3.  Considerations on an approach for establishing a framework for bioactive food components.

Authors:  Kathleen Ellwood; Douglas A Balentine; Johanna T Dwyer; John W Erdman; P Courtney Gaine; Catherine L Kwik-Uribe
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 8.701

Review 4.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of the effect of barley β-glucan on LDL-C, non-HDL-C and apoB for cardiovascular disease risk reductioni-iv.

Authors:  H V T Ho; J L Sievenpiper; A Zurbau; S Blanco Mejia; E Jovanovski; F Au-Yeung; A L Jenkins; V Vuksan
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 4.016

Review 5.  Practical Dietary Recommendations for the Prevention and Management of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Adults.

Authors:  Elena S George; Adrienne Forsyth; Catherine Itsiopoulos; Amanda J Nicoll; Marno Ryan; Siddharth Sood; Stuart K Roberts; Audrey C Tierney
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2018-01-01       Impact factor: 8.701

6.  LOW BACK PAIN AND INJURY IN BALLET, MODERN, AND HIP-HOP DANCERS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.

Authors:  Erica D Henn; Tina Smith; Jatin P Ambegaonkar; Matthew Wyon
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2020-10

7.  Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group.

Authors:  David Atkins; Martin Eccles; Signe Flottorp; Gordon H Guyatt; David Henry; Suzanne Hill; Alessandro Liberati; Dianne O'Connell; Andrew D Oxman; Bob Phillips; Holger Schünemann; Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer; Gunn E Vist; John W Williams
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2004-12-22       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  A Systematic Review and Recommendations Around Frameworks for Evaluating Scientific Validity in Nutritional Genomics.

Authors:  Justine Keathley; Véronique Garneau; Daniela Zavala-Mora; Robyn R Heister; Ellie Gauthier; Josiane Morin-Bernier; Robert Green; Marie-Claude Vohl
Journal:  Front Nutr       Date:  2021-12-14

Review 9.  A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools.

Authors:  Persis Katrak; Andrea E Bialocerkowski; Nicola Massy-Westropp; Saravana Kumar; Karen A Grimmer
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2004-09-16       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 10.  Rating the quality of a body of evidence on the effectiveness of health and social interventions: A systematic review and mapping of evidence domains.

Authors:  Ani Movsisyan; Jane Dennis; Eva Rehfuess; Sean Grant; Paul Montgomery
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 5.273

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.