Literature DB >> 26827182

GRADE: Assessing the quality of evidence in environmental and occupational health.

Rebecca L Morgan1, Kristina A Thayer2, Lisa Bero3, Nigel Bruce4, Yngve Falck-Ytter5, Davina Ghersi6, Gordon Guyatt7, Carlijn Hooijmans8, Miranda Langendam9, Daniele Mandrioli10, Reem A Mustafa11, Eva A Rehfuess12, Andrew A Rooney13, Beverley Shea14, Ellen K Silbergeld15, Patrice Sutton16, Mary S Wolfe17, Tracey J Woodruff18, Jos H Verbeek19, Alison C Holloway20, Nancy Santesso21, Holger J Schünemann22.   

Abstract

There is high demand in environmental health for adoption of a structured process that evaluates and integrates evidence while making decisions and recommendations transparent. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework holds promise to address this demand. For over a decade, GRADE has been applied successfully to areas of clinical medicine, public health, and health policy, but experience with GRADE in environmental and occupational health is just beginning. Environmental and occupational health questions focus on understanding whether an exposure is a potential health hazard or risk, assessing the exposure to understand the extent and magnitude of risk, and exploring interventions to mitigate exposure or risk. Although GRADE offers many advantages, including its flexibility and methodological rigor, there are features of the different sources of evidence used in environmental and occupational health that will require further consideration to assess the need for method refinement. An issue that requires particular attention is the evaluation and integration of evidence from human, animal, in vitro, and in silico (computer modeling) studies when determining whether an environmental factor represents a potential health hazard or risk. Assessment of the hazard of exposures can produce analyses for use in the GRADE evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework to inform risk-management decisions about removing harmful exposures or mitigating risks. The EtD framework allows for grading the strength of the recommendations based on judgments of the certainty in the evidence (also known as quality of the evidence), as well as other factors that inform recommendations such as social values and preferences, resource implications, and benefits. GRADE represents an untapped opportunity for environmental and occupational health to make evidence-based recommendations in a systematic and transparent manner. The objectives of this article are to provide an overview of GRADE, discuss GRADE's applicability to environmental health, and identify priority areas for method assessment and development.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Environmental health; Evidence-based; GRADE; Recommendations; Risk assessment; Risk of bias

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26827182      PMCID: PMC4902742          DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2016.01.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Int        ISSN: 0160-4120            Impact factor:   9.621


  42 in total

1.  GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Regina Kunz; David Atkins; Jan Brozek; Gunn Vist; Philip Alderson; Paul Glasziou; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Holger J Schünemann
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-12-30       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  GRADE guidelines: a new series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Holger J Schünemann; Peter Tugwell; Andre Knottnerus
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 3.  Methods for developing evidence-based recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Authors:  Faruque Ahmed; Jonathan L Temte; Doug Campos-Outcalt; Holger J Schünemann
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 3.641

Review 4.  Night-shift work and breast cancer--a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sharea Ijaz; Jos Verbeek; Andreas Seidler; Marja-Liisa Lindbohm; Anneli Ojajärvi; Nicola Orsini; Giovanni Costa; Kaisa Neuvonen
Journal:  Scand J Work Environ Health       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 5.024

5.  Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies.

Authors:  Holger J Schünemann; A Holger J Schünemann; Andrew D Oxman; Jan Brozek; Paul Glasziou; Roman Jaeschke; Gunn E Vist; John W Williams; Regina Kunz; Jonathan Craig; Victor M Montori; Patrick Bossuyt; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-05-17

6.  GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Gunn E Vist; Regina Kunz; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Holger J Schünemann
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-04-26

7.  Quality of evidence is a key determinant for making a strong GRADE guidelines recommendation.

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic; Ambuj Kumar; Richard M Kaufman; Aaron Tobian; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2015-02-07       Impact factor: 6.437

8.  Implementing systematic review in toxicological profiles: ATSDR and NIEHS/NTP collaboration.

Authors:  H Edward Murray; Kristina A Thayer
Journal:  J Environ Health       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.179

9.  IARC monographs: 40 years of evaluating carcinogenic hazards to humans.

Authors:  Neil Pearce; Aaron Blair; Paolo Vineis; Wolfgang Ahrens; Aage Andersen; Josep M Anto; Bruce K Armstrong; Andrea A Baccarelli; Frederick A Beland; Amy Berrington; Pier Alberto Bertazzi; Linda S Birnbaum; Ross C Brownson; John R Bucher; Kenneth P Cantor; Elisabeth Cardis; John W Cherrie; David C Christiani; Pierluigi Cocco; David Coggon; Pietro Comba; Paul A Demers; John M Dement; Jeroen Douwes; Ellen A Eisen; Lawrence S Engel; Richard A Fenske; Lora E Fleming; Tony Fletcher; Elizabeth Fontham; Francesco Forastiere; Rainer Frentzel-Beyme; Lin Fritschi; Michel Gerin; Marcel Goldberg; Philippe Grandjean; Tom K Grimsrud; Per Gustavsson; Andy Haines; Patricia Hartge; Johnni Hansen; Michael Hauptmann; Dick Heederik; Kari Hemminki; Denis Hemon; Irva Hertz-Picciotto; Jane A Hoppin; James Huff; Bengt Jarvholm; Daehee Kang; Margaret R Karagas; Kristina Kjaerheim; Helge Kjuus; Manolis Kogevinas; David Kriebel; Petter Kristensen; Hans Kromhout; Francine Laden; Pierre Lebailly; Grace LeMasters; Jay H Lubin; Charles F Lynch; Elsebeth Lynge; Andrea 't Mannetje; Anthony J McMichael; John R McLaughlin; Loraine Marrett; Marco Martuzzi; James A Merchant; Enzo Merler; Franco Merletti; Anthony Miller; Franklin E Mirer; Richard Monson; Karl-Cristian Nordby; Andrew F Olshan; Marie-Elise Parent; Frederica P Perera; Melissa J Perry; Angela Cecilia Pesatori; Roberta Pirastu; Miquel Porta; Eero Pukkala; Carol Rice; David B Richardson; Leonard Ritter; Beate Ritz; Cecile M Ronckers; Lesley Rushton; Jennifer A Rusiecki; Ivan Rusyn; Jonathan M Samet; Dale P Sandler; Silvia de Sanjose; Eva Schernhammer; Adele Seniori Costantini; Noah Seixas; Carl Shy; Jack Siemiatycki; Debra T Silverman; Lorenzo Simonato; Allan H Smith; Martyn T Smith; John J Spinelli; Margaret R Spitz; Lorann Stallones; Leslie T Stayner; Kyle Steenland; Mark Stenzel; Bernard W Stewart; Patricia A Stewart; Elaine Symanski; Benedetto Terracini; Paige E Tolbert; Harri Vainio; John Vena; Roel Vermeulen; Cesar G Victora; Elizabeth M Ward; Clarice R Weinberg; Dennis Weisenburger; Catharina Wesseling; Elisabete Weiderpass; Shelia Hoar Zahm
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2015-02-24       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  SYRCLE's risk of bias tool for animal studies.

Authors:  Carlijn R Hooijmans; Maroeska M Rovers; Rob B M de Vries; Marlies Leenaars; Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga; Miranda W Langendam
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  48 in total

1.  Identifying the PECO: A framework for formulating good questions to explore the association of environmental and other exposures with health outcomes.

Authors:  Rebecca L Morgan; Paul Whaley; Kristina A Thayer; Holger J Schünemann
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2018-08-27       Impact factor: 9.621

2.  Association of Blood Pressure With Outcomes in Acute Stroke Thrombectomy.

Authors:  Konark Malhotra; Nitin Goyal; Aristeidis H Katsanos; Angeliki Filippatou; Eva A Mistry; Pooja Khatri; Mohammad Anadani; Alejandro M Spiotta; Else Charlotte Sandset; Amrou Sarraj; Georgios Magoufis; Christos Krogias; Lars Tönges; Apostolos Safouris; Lucas Elijovich; Mayank Goyal; Adam Arthur; Andrei V Alexandrov; Georgios Tsivgoulis
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2020-01-13       Impact factor: 10.190

3.  Cross-discipline evidence principles for sustainability policy.

Authors:  Edward T Game; Heather Tallis; Lydia Olander; Steven M Alexander; Jonah Busch; Nancy Cartwright; Elizabeth L Kalies; Yuta J Masuda; Anne-Christine Mupepele; Jiangxiao Qiu; Andrew Rooney; Erin Sills; William J Sutherland
Journal:  Nat Sustain       Date:  2018-09-14

4.  Reproducibility and Research Integrity.

Authors:  David B Resnik; Adil E Shamoo
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2016-11-07       Impact factor: 2.622

Review 5.  WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region: A Systematic Review on Environmental Noise and Cardiovascular and Metabolic Effects: A Summary.

Authors:  Elise van Kempen; Maribel Casas; Göran Pershagen; Maria Foraster
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  The effect of exposure to long working hours on ischaemic heart disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.

Authors:  Jian Li; Frank Pega; Yuka Ujita; Chantal Brisson; Els Clays; Alexis Descatha; Marco M Ferrario; Lode Godderis; Sergio Iavicoli; Paul A Landsbergis; Maria-Inti Metzendorf; Rebecca L Morgan; Daniela V Pachito; Hynek Pikhart; Bernd Richter; Mattia Roncaioli; Reiner Rugulies; Peter L Schnall; Grace Sembajwe; Xavier Trudel; Akizumi Tsutsumi; Tracey J Woodruff; Johannes Siegrist
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 9.621

7.  A risk of bias instrument for non-randomized studies of exposures: A users' guide to its application in the context of GRADE.

Authors:  Rebecca L Morgan; Kristina A Thayer; Nancy Santesso; Alison C Holloway; Robyn Blain; Sorina E Eftim; Alexandra E Goldstone; Pam Ross; Mohammed Ansari; Elie A Akl; Tommaso Filippini; Anna Hansell; Joerg J Meerpohl; Reem A Mustafa; Jos Verbeek; Marco Vinceti; Paul Whaley; Holger J Schünemann
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 9.621

8.  The effect of occupational exposure to noise on ischaemic heart disease, stroke and hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-Related Burden of Disease and Injury.

Authors:  Liliane R Teixeira; Frank Pega; Angel M Dzhambov; Alicja Bortkiewicz; Denise T Correa da Silva; Carlos A F de Andrade; Elzbieta Gadzicka; Kishor Hadkhale; Sergio Iavicoli; Martha S Martínez-Silveira; Małgorzata Pawlaczyk-Łuszczyńska; Bruna M Rondinone; Jadwiga Siedlecka; Antonio Valenti; Diana Gagliardi
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2021-02-18       Impact factor: 9.621

9.  Frailty as a mortality predictor in older adults with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.

Authors:  Ita Daryanti Saragih; Shailesh Advani; Ice Septriani Saragih; Ira Suarilah; Irwan Susanto; Chia-Ju Lin
Journal:  Geriatr Nurs       Date:  2021-06-12       Impact factor: 2.361

10.  Systematic reviews and meta-analyses for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.

Authors:  Frank Pega; Natalie C Momen; Yuka Ujita; Tim Driscoll; Paul Whaley
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 9.621

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.