Literature DB >> 8691224

Rating the quality of evidence for clinical practice guidelines.

D C Hadorn1, D Baker, J S Hodges, N Hicks.   

Abstract

This article describes the system for rating the quality of medical evidence developed and used during creation of the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research-sponsored heart failure guideline. Previous approaches to rating evidence were not designed for use in the setting of clinical practice guidelines. The present system is based on the tenet that flaws in research design are serious to the extent they threaten the validity of the results of studies. A taxonomy of major and minor flaws based on that tenet was developed for randomized controlled trials and for cohort and medical registry studies. The use of the system is described in the context of two difficult clinical issues considered by the Panel: the role of coronary artery revascularization and the use of metoprolol.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8691224     DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(96)00019-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  74 in total

Review 1.  Which guidelines can we trust?: Assessing strength of evidence behind recommendations for clinical practice.

Authors:  A Liberati; R Buzzetti; R Grilli; N Magrini; S Minozzi
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  2001-04

Review 2.  [Meta-analysis as a tool for evaluation of evidence].

Authors:  A Koch; S Ziegler
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  2000-02-15

3.  A new system for grading recommendations in evidence based guidelines.

Authors:  R Harbour; J Miller
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-08-11

Review 4.  Reassessing the relevance of pharmacoeconomic analyses in formulary decisions.

Authors:  J A Johnson; E Friesen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  [Guidelines for German urologists on diagnosis of benign prostate syndrome].

Authors:  R Berges; K Dreikorn; K Höfner; U Jonas; K U Laval; S Madersbacher; M C Michel; R Muschter; M Oelke; L Pientka; C Tschuschke; U Tunn; K Schalkhäuser; B Göckel-Beining; A Heidenreich; H Rübben; K Schalkhäuser; W Thon; J Thüroff; W Weidner
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2003-03-12       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  Validation of expert opinion in identifying comorbidities associated with atopic dermatitis/eczema.

Authors:  Charles N Ellis; Lynn A Drake; Mary M Prendergast; William Abramovits; Mark Boguniewicz; C Ralph Daniel; Mark Lebwohl; Seth R Stevens; Diane L Whitaker-Worth; Kuo B Tong
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 7.  A critical review of guidelines for low back pain treatment.

Authors:  Josep M Arnau; Antoni Vallano; Anna Lopez; Ferran Pellisé; Maria J Delgado; Nuria Prat
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-10-11       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  [New developments in the pharmacotherapy of cocaine dependence].

Authors:  G Wiesbeck; K Dürsteler-MacFarland
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.214

Review 9.  Amifostine in the management of radiation-induced and chemo-induced mucositis.

Authors:  Rene-Jean Bensadoun; Mark M Schubert; Rajesh V Lalla; Dorothy Keefe
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-04-04       Impact factor: 3.603

10.  Osteonecrosis of the jaw related to non-antiresorptive medications: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ourania Nicolatou-Galitis; Maria Kouri; Erofili Papadopoulou; Emmanouil Vardas; Dimitra Galiti; Joel B Epstein; Sharon Elad; Giuseppina Campisi; Nikolaos Tsoukalas; Kivanc Bektas-Kayhan; Winston Tan; Jean-Jacques Body; Cesar Migliorati; Rajesh V Lalla
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 3.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.