Cochrane Update Assessing evidence in public health: the added value of GRADE
|
|
- Beatrix Janis Stevens
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Journal of Public Health Vol. 34, No. 4, pp doi: /pubmed/fds092 Cochrane Update Assessing evidence in public health: the added value of GRADE Belinda J. Burford 1,2, Eva Rehfuess 3, Holger J. Schünemann 4,5, Elie A. Akl 4,6, Elizabeth Waters 1,2, Rebecca Armstrong 1,2, Hilary Thomson 7, Jodie Doyle 1,2, Tahna Pettman 1,2 1 Jack Brockhoff Child Health and Wellbeing Program, Melbourne, Australia 2 Cochrane Public Health Group, McCaughey Centre, Melbourne School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia 3 Institute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University of Munich, Germany 4 Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada L8S 4K1 5 Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada L8S 4K1 6 Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon 7 MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Glasgow G12 8RZ, UK Address correspondence to Belinda J. Burford, b.burford@unimelb.edu.au Introduction Concepts of public health vary globally, from countries and continents where public health is focused on preventive medicine and health-care systems, to areas where public health is conceptualized as focusing on social and macrolevel intergovernmental strategies, including health policies. The ways in which evidence evolves within this context includes specifically designed primary research, convenient or pragmatic evaluations with rigourous methodologies, and evaluations that capitalize on opportunities due to politics, circumstance or resources. These challenges, acknowledging they are not limited to public health, mean that formulating clear public health questions to ask of the evidence is crucial. Evidence collected in the context of population or public health should, as in any health-care setting, be used to make decisions about whether or not to implement new strategies, maintain or stop existing strategies. However, assessing evidence in public health presents some challenges that require resolution. For instance, some public health strategies or interventions can be implemented over a short time frame (e.g. outside smoking laws) while others may require intergenerational programmes (e.g. obesity prevention). Another challenge for public health and health promotion interventions is the understanding of harm or unintended consequence. Due to their emphasis on health promotion and prevention, there is a risk that public health interventions are perceived to be free of harms. This may be due to the fact that harms associated with clinical interventions, such as pharmacological or surgical interventions, are much more obvious. However, we know that implementation of any intervention or strategy presents a risk of harm, which needs to be anticipated and evaluated. Within the context of the spectrum of public health evidence, the quality of the evidence is an important component of the decision-making and knowledge-translation process. For interventions tha t seek to identify effectiveness, this requires an assessment of the degree of certainty that estimates of outcomes reported in a group of studies are high enough to support decisions or recommendations. GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) is the most widely endorsed framework for assessing the quality of a body of evidence and deriving the strength of a potential evidence-informed recommendation. It has an ever-strengthening presence in clinical decisions ( and much investment is currently being made in public health to assess its appropriateness and usefulness. 1 Belinda J. Burford, Research Fellow and Methods Advisor Eva Rehfuess, Senior Scientist Holger J. Schünemann, Professor and Chair Elie A. Akl, Associate Professor of Medicine Elizabeth Waters, Professor, Jack Brockhoff Chair of Child Public Health, and Coordinating Editor Rebecca Armstrong, Senior Research Fellow, Knowledge Translation & Public Health Evidence, Editorial and Methods Advisor Hilary Thomson, Senior Investigator Scientist Jodie Doyle, Managing Editor Tahna Pettman, Research Fellow, Evidence and Knowledge Translation Team # The Author 2012, Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health. All rights reserved 631
2 632 JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH Assessing a body of evidence using GRADE In GRADE, the quality of evidence is defined as the extent of the confidence that the estimate of an effect is adequate to support a particular decision or recommendation. This assessment of quality of evidence considers study design, as well as five criteria that might decrease our confidence (i.e. risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency in results across studies, publication bias and the lack of comparability of the population, intervention and outcomes of interest to those in the available studies) and three criteria that might increase our confidence (i.e. strong association, dose response gradient, opposing residual plausible confounding and bias). The assessment results in an overall GRADE rating of high (), moderate ( ), low ( )orverylow ( ). For more detail on this process, readers should refer to a series of papers in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2 Given that the evaluation of the quality domains may involve subjective judgements, the GRADE framework seeks to make these judgements and their rationale explicit, transparent and as reliable as possible. There are important differences between GRADE and other evidence rating systems: GRADE offers a standardized presentation of the summary of evidence with an emphasis on transparency, consideration of the quality of evidence is at the outcome level (rather than at the study level), factors other than study design alone are considered for rating the quality of evidence and, based on these, there is the opportunity to rate the quality of evidence up or down. Challenges with applying GRADE in PH reviews and potential solutions All Cochrane intervention reviews are required to use GRADE or at least comment on the GRADE criteria in the discussion of findings ( cochrane.org/mecir). The Cochrane Public Health Group (CPHG) is working with authors of reviews to address the challenges of applying the GRADE framework within reviews which typically involve complex, population-level interventions. There is some debate as to the relevance or appropriateness of using the GRADE framework to assess the effectiveness of public health interventions 3 8 ). Here we briefly highlight some common challenges in applying GRADE within public health evidence reviews and discuss approaches for dealing with these. We provide reasons for why we believe it is useful and appropriate to consider the GRADE criteria in such reviews. This is not intended to be a comprehensive discussion of all concerns in detail, but to encourage the use of GRADE and documentation of specific challenges encountered, as well as to stimulate further debate and discussion regarding how to appropriately evaluate evidence in public health for decision-making. If randomized controlled trials are not appropriate or possible, why does GRADE penalize for that? The first step in the GRADE process is to identify whether the evidence in question was derived from randomized controlled trials or other types of studies. This determines whether the starting point in GRADE is high (for randomized controlled trials) or low (other types of studies). Many think it is unfair to penalize the quality of evidence in a context where randomization may not be feasible (e.g. implementation of jurisdiction-wide public health laws) or ethical (e.g. examining the links between exposure to a workplace hazard and health outcomes). Consequently, it could be suggested that the best possible evidence (i.e. from observational studies) should be rated as high quality. However, starting non-randomized studies at a lower GRADE should not be viewed as a penalty, rather it is an acknowledgement that not randomizing simply decreases our certainty that observed effects in the intervention group compared with the comparison group are in fact due to the intervention itself. The benefit of randomization in minimizing the risk of selection bias and confounding is commonly accepted, and has been tested empirically. 9 An alternative way to conceptualize GRADE may be to think of the GRADE process as all studies starting out equally, and randomization being one factor to warrant upgrading. This alternative framing reassures many users when they think of randomization as being considered on par with the other upgrading criteria. Are all observational studies equal in GRADE? Although the initial quality rating for all observational studies is a (read 2 plus) rating, the GRADE process requires that domains beyond that of risk of bias (also called limitations in study design and execution) contribute to the final GRADE rating. In GRADE, only the final assessment of quality matters, that is, the confidence or certainty in effect estimates (including its direction) after evaluating all relevant domains. Therefore, although it appears at first glance that cross-sectional studies receive the same level of certainty as more appropriate designs, a full evaluation using the GRADE criteria demonstrates that GRADE makes no such assumption. This is because an evaluation of the risk of bias will lead to a more specific assessment of the strength and weaknesses of the designs.
3 ASSESSING EVIDENCE IN PUBLIC HEALTH 633 The more pertinent issue to focus on is the question of whether there are domains not currently considered by GRADE that could lead to an increase in the quality of evidence. This issue continues to be discussed by the GRADE Working Group. Can there be too much heterogeneity to apply GRADE? Heterogeneity is inevitable when considering evaluations of most public health interventions and programmes, with study heterogeneity often resulting in statistical heterogeneity. Study heterogeneity can be a result of differing populations, settings, and contexts as well as variability in the intervention itself, or differences in comparison conditions or outcome measures. They can also be the result of varying methodological quality between studies. All of these differences, which can occur with any health-care question, are likely to have an impact on the measured effectiveness of an intervention, so must be documented in a systematic review. Such heterogeneity can mean authors feel that some standard systematic review approaches, including GRADE, may not apply. However, an important aspect of the GRADE process is to assess for inconsistency in the findings between studies included in a review and to think about appropriate grouping of populations, settings, interventions, comparisons, outcomes and methodologies. If inconsistency is identified there is a need to explore the underlying reasons, typically by conducting subgroup or sensitivity analyses. This raises the issue of appropriate and credible subgroup analyses, which is beyond the scope of this paper. Interested readers should refer to refs (10, 11). Importantly, such potential differences must be considered in the initial stages of the review process in deciding whether or not studies are sufficiently similar to be combined to answer a question of interest to decision-makers. It should not be assumed that narrow review questions are preferred in order to reduce the likelihood of inconsistency. Rather, decision-makers may want to know about the evidence base for a range of potential options for addressing a problem. Depending on the purpose of the systematic review (e.g. searching for a clear signal across different but related interventions), study heterogeneity may be expected to result in a large degree of statistical heterogeneity. In this scenario, it may seem that downgrading due to inconsistency will be inevitable but review authors should carefully consider whether this is merited, especially where subgroup analyses or meta-regression help explain some of the observed statistical heterogeneity. If everything depends on context, is GRADE meaningful? Public health interventions are often highly dependent on context, so different findings may be expected if the programme is repeated in another setting. As the GRADE rating articulates how likely it is that further research will change our confidence in the estimate of effects, it can seem as though applying GRADE in this scenario may be less meaningful. However, where context is so crucial, it is arguably even more important to be explicit in acknowledging this in a summary of the evidence about what an intervention or programme achieves. Otherwise, decision-makers may, rightly so, expect to see the same level of effectiveness in their setting/community. GRADE provides a useful prompt to consider the important issue of context in public health. In cases where the effects may be highly dependent on the context, GRADE allows this to be incorporated into the process of assessing the evidence. Details about the particular contextual factors that are especially critical in mediating the effects in included studies can be documented, thus allowing readers to more appropriately judge whether similar interventions in their own context are likely to have similar results. If there is no pooled effect size, can GRADE still be used? In many reviews, there are outcomes for which it is not possible to provide a pooled effect size, perhaps due to significant heterogeneity (across studies, populations, interventions and outcomes) or lack of data due to insufficient evidence or reporting. Some argue that this makes important aspects of GRADE meaningless, such as imprecision and inconsistency; it also makes the presentations of findings more challenging. While it is true that there are limitations to what can be said about precision without an effect estimate, it is important to consider the intention behind examining precision when summarizing the evidence of effectiveness. Even without a pooled effect size, if similar outcomes are summarized from a group of studies, there must be information about the effects observed in the individual studies. The question then becomes: how precise an estimate is obtainable from each study and, collectively, what does that look like? To answer this question, the individual effect sizes and confidence intervals observed in each study should be examined. Precision is also related to the amount of information, so a judgement of sufficient information (in terms of numbers of participants and/or numbers of events) is required to give reliable estimates. A rough rule of thumb
4 634 JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH provided by the GRADE working group is at least 3000 participants, and for dichotomous outcomes, at least 300 events. 12 In terms of assessing consistency of findings, it is important to consider whether all studies are providing a similar indication of effect or whether there are conflicting findings. Again, examining effect estimates and associated confidence intervals will provide an indication of this. If there are no estimates of effect from individual studies, it is important to question what is being assessed from the studies. Perhaps it is to ascertain whether or not there are positive outcomes, regardless of effect size. Perhaps the review is intended to be a map of the current evidence base, similar to a scoping review. These questions are intrinsically linked to what conclusions can be drawn from the evidence. In any case, inconsistency and imprecision should be addressed in an effectiveness review, and the lack of a pooled effect size, while posing challenges in making decisions about the level of inconsistency and imprecision, does not seem to present reasonable justification for ignoring fundamental questions about what the evidence is suggesting. A structured approach to assessing the included studies even in the absence of meta-analytical results can also help identify the research agenda more clearly. Several summaries produced by the SUPPORT Collaboration ( support-collaboration.org/) provide excellent examples of how to apply GRADE and present findings in the absence of pooled effect estimates. What are the implications of the final GRADE rating? It is reasonable to assume that a lot of evidence in public health reviews may have a GRADE rating of or (low or very low). One frequently expressed concern is whether this might be used as a reason for not valuing the available evidence base and subsequently not implementing potentially beneficial public health interventions. In fact, this concern is not restricted to public health. The implications of quality ratings for users of the evidence should always be considered, regardless of the framework used to arrive at such ratings. What is needed is an understanding of what the GRADE rating means, how best to communicate it to decision-makers and to separate the evidence assessment from developing recommendations. GRADE refers to our certainty in an effect estimate, or if there is no effect estimate, our certainty in the summarized findings from the body of evidence. That is, how likely is it that the findings reported could be substantially different in the contexts in which the review findings are intended to be applied? The rating on its own does not provide particularly useful information for the reader; however, the reasons for rating down could be useful. Review authors should also consider whether or not the GRADE rating is an accurate reflection of their true confidence in the evidence, and what other types of research might increase their confidence. The GRADE Working Group welcomes examples where there is a mismatch between the GRADE rating and our confidence in a body of evidence. If the current GRADE terminology for each rating sounds too negative or judgemental in certain contexts, there is also the option of using different terminology or relying solely on symbols. Regardless, careful documentation of the decisions taken to arrive at different ratings is what can provide useful information for decision-makers. It is also important to acknowledge that recommending a particular intervention or strategy depends not only on the quality of evidence to support the decision, but also on a range of other factors which impact on effectiveness, such as cost-effectiveness, acceptability, feasibility and many other issues. There is some criticism that GRADE is not as rigorous for assessing these other factors as it is for determining the quality of the evidence 13 and that the range of factors considered in going from evidence to recommendations may need to be broadened. Efforts are underway in the context of the DECIDE project (Developing and Evaluating Communication Strategies to Support Informed Decisions and Practice Based on Evidence) to develop a more systematic, transparent and comprehensive way to consider and document the decisions leading to a recommendation ( decide-collaboration.eu/). Conclusion Decision-makers choosing between various strategies to address public health issues need to make an informed assessment of the benefits and potential harms of the alternatives and ensure that limited resources are used wisely. The GRADE framework is widely endorsed internationally, providing a standardized approach for assessing the quality of a body of effectiveness evidence. It increases transparency, and explicitness, and potentially reduces the influence of conflicts of interests in evidence assessment and interpretation. The World Health Organization, for example, requires all guidelines to be underpinned by evidence that has been assessed using the GRADE process. There are significant advantages in using the same framework to assess effectiveness evidence across both clinical and public health spheres. While it is important to acknowledge the challenges in assessing the effectiveness of more upstream, population-level
5 ASSESSING EVIDENCE IN PUBLIC HEALTH 635 approaches, these challenges are not sufficient to argue that the GRADE criteria are not relevant in public health. There is sufficient flexibility in applying the GRADE criteria and upgrading and downgrading decisions should meaningfully reflect our confidence in the findings. Many more examples of the application of the GRADE criteria in public health are required to examine the issues carefully and propose areas for improvement. Acknowledgements Eva Rehfuess acknowledges financial support from the Munich Center of Health Sciences. The CPHG acknowledges the support of the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) and the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia. References New Cochrane protocols and reviews of interest to health promotion and public health stakeholders from Issues 8 9, 2012 of The Cochrane Library (*denotes CPHG review/protocol) Child health Interventions for tobacco use prevention in Indigenous youth Motivational interviewing for improving outcomes in youth living with HIV Consumer and communication strategies for clinical communication between health-care professionals Community health *Fortification of staple foods with vitamin A for preventing vitamin A deficiency ( protocol: review underway Interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community (updated) *Slum upgrading strategies involving physical environment and infrastructure interventions and their effects on health and socio-economic outcomes ( protocol: review underway) Effective practice/health systems Integration of HIV/AIDS services with maternal, neonatal and child health, nutrition and family planning services Interventions to improve the use of systematic reviews in decision-making by health system managers, policy-makers and clinicians Injury prevention Home safety education and provision of safety equipment for injury prevention (updated) Pregnancy and childbirth Antenatal breastfeeding education for increasing breastfeeding duration (updated) Antenatal dietary advice and supplementation to increase energy and protein intake (updated) Optimal duration of exclusive breastfeeding (updated) 1 Akl EA, Kennedy C, Konda K et al. Using GRADE methodology for the development of public health guidelines for the prevention and treatment of HIV and other STIs among men who have sex with men and transgender people. BMC Public Health 2012;12:386; doi: / Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Schünemann HJ et al. GRADE guidelines: a new series of articles. J Clin Epidemiol 2011a;64: Duclos P, Durrheim DN, Reingold A et al. Developing evidencebased immunisation recommendations and GRADE. Vaccine, 2012; /j.vaccine Durrheim DN, Reingold A. Modifying the GRADE framework could benefit public health. J Epidemiol Community Health 2010;64: ECDC. Evidence-based methodologies for public health. Stockholm: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Rehfuess EA, Bruce N, Prüss-Üstün A. GRADE for the advancement of public health. J Epidemiol Community Health 2011;65: Schünemann H, Hill S, Guyatt G et al. The GRADE approach and Bradford Hill s criteria for causation. J Epidemiol Community Health 2010;65:392e5. 8 WHO. Guidance for the development of evidence-based vaccine-related recommendations. Continuous updates are available at recommendations.pdf (25 June 2012, last date accessed). 9 Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D Amico R et al. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 2003;7(27): Sun X, Briel M, Walter SD et al. Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses. BMJ 2010;340:c Sun X, Briel M, Busse JW et al. Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. BMJ 2012;344:e Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Kunz R et al. GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol 2011b;64: Barbui C, Dua T, van Ommeren M et al. Challenges in developing evidence-based recommendations using the GRADE approach: the case of mental, neurological and substance use disorders. PLOS Med 2010;7(8):e
Washington, DC, November 9, 2009 Institute of Medicine
Holger Schünemann, MD, PhD Chair, Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics Michael Gent Chair in Healthcare Research McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada Washington, DC, November 9, 2009 Institute
More informationPHO MetaQAT Guide. Critical appraisal in public health. PHO Meta-tool for quality appraisal
PHO MetaQAT Guide Critical appraisal in public health Critical appraisal is a necessary part of evidence-based practice and decision-making, allowing us to understand the strengths and weaknesses of evidence,
More informationGuideline development in TB diagnostics. Karen R Steingart, MD, MPH McGill University, Montreal, July 2011
Guideline development in TB diagnostics Karen R Steingart, MD, MPH McGill University, Montreal, July 2011 karenst@uw.edu Overview What are guidelines? Quality of guidelines The Grade approach IOM standards
More informationThe Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers Manual 2014
The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers Manual 2014 Summary of Findings Tables for Joanna Briggs Institute Systematic Reviews www.joannabriggs.org Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers Manual: 2014 edition/supplement
More informationCopyright GRADE ING THE QUALITY OF EVIDENCE AND STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATIONS NANCY SANTESSO, RD, PHD
GRADE ING THE QUALITY OF EVIDENCE AND STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATIONS NANCY SANTESSO, RD, PHD ASSISTANT PROFESSOR DEPARTMENT OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY AND BIOSTATISTICS, MCMASTER UNIVERSITY Nancy Santesso,
More informationGRADE. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. British Association of Dermatologists April 2014
GRADE Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation British Association of Dermatologists April 2014 Previous grading system Level of evidence Strength of recommendation Level of evidence
More informationReporting the effects of an intervention in EPOC reviews. Version: 21 June 2018 Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group
Reporting the effects of an intervention in EPOC reviews Version: 21 June 2018 Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Feedback on how to improve this resource is welcome and should
More informationGRADE. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. British Association of Dermatologists April 2018
GRADE Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation British Association of Dermatologists April 2018 Previous grading system Level of evidence Strength of recommendation Level of evidence
More informationCochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Methodological Guidelines
Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Methodological Guidelines [Prepared by Simon Gates: July 2009, updated July 2012] These guidelines are intended to aid quality and consistency across the reviews
More informationAuthors face many challenges when summarising results in reviews.
Describing results Authors face many challenges when summarising results in reviews. This document aims to help authors to develop clear, consistent messages about the effects of interventions in reviews,
More informationOutcomes and GRADE Summary of Findings Tables: old and new
Holger Schünemann, MD, PhD Chair, Dept. of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics Professor of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics and of Medicine Michael Gent Chair in Healthcare Research McMaster University,
More informationControlled Trials. Spyros Kitsiou, PhD
Assessing Risk of Bias in Randomized Controlled Trials Spyros Kitsiou, PhD Assistant Professor Department of Biomedical and Health Information Sciences College of Applied Health Sciences University of
More informationObjectives. Information proliferation. Guidelines: Evidence or Expert opinion or???? 21/01/2017. Evidence-based clinical decisions
Guidelines: Evidence or Expert opinion or???? Objectives Need for guidelines? Prakesh Shah Professor, Department of Pediatrics, Mount Sinai Hospital Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation
More informationBuilding the Evidence for Global Public Health
School of Population Health University of Melbourne Building the Evidence for Global Public Health Exploratory Meeting of the Proposed Cochrane Public Health Collaborative Review Group Monday 29th October
More informationGuideline Development At WHO
Guideline Development At WHO Susan L. Norris, MD MPH MSc Guidelines Review Committee Secretariat September 24, 2015 1 Questions Who has ever used a clinical practice guideline? Who regularly uses clinical
More informationBACKGROUND + GENERAL COMMENTS
Response on behalf of Sobi (Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB) to the European Commission s Public Consultation on a Commission Notice on the Application of Articles 3, 5 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000
More informationAn evidence rating scale for New Zealand
Social Policy Evaluation and Research Unit An evidence rating scale for New Zealand Understanding the effectiveness of interventions in the social sector Using Evidence for Impact MARCH 2017 About Superu
More informationCochrane-GRADE Workshop
Cochrane-GRADE Workshop Modena, June 2017 Holger Schünemann, Elena Parmelli, Sara Balduzzi Jane Noyes, Heather Munthe-Kaas, Claire Glenton Background / history of GRADE and GRADE CERQual Deep vein thrombosis
More informationResults. NeuRA Treatments for internalised stigma December 2017
Introduction Internalised stigma occurs within an individual, such that a person s attitude may reinforce a negative self-perception of mental disorders, resulting in reduced sense of selfworth, anticipation
More informationOverview and Comparisons of Risk of Bias and Strength of Evidence Assessment Tools: Opportunities and Challenges of Application in Developing DRIs
Workshop on Guiding Principles for the Inclusion of Chronic Diseases Endpoints in Future Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) Overview and Comparisons of Risk of Bias and Strength of Evidence Assessment Tools:
More informationThe Ever Changing World of Sepsis Management. Laura Evans MD MSc Medical Director of Critical Care Bellevue Hospital
The Ever Changing World of Sepsis Management Laura Evans MD MSc Medical Director of Critical Care Bellevue Hospital COI Disclosures No financial interests to disclose Learning Objectives Review the evolution
More informationSSAI Clinical Practice Committee guideline work flow v2. A. Formal matters
SSAI Clinical Practice Committee guideline work flow v2 The following document outlines key steps (Figure 1) in the development and/or endorsement of Scandinavian SSAI clinical practice guidelines. A.
More informationMINI SYMPOSIUM - EUMASS - UEMASS European Union of Medicine in Assurance and Social Security
MINI SYMPOSIUM - EUMASS - UEMASS European Union of Medicine in Assurance and Social Security Quality of Evidence and Grades of Recommendations in guidelines A role for insurance medicine? Prof. Regina
More informationMEETING REPORT INTERCONNECT: A GLOBAL INITIATIVE ON GENE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION IN DIABETES AND OBESITY.
MEETING REPORT INTERCONNECT: A GLOBAL INITIATIVE ON GENE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION IN DIABETES AND OBESITY. Funded by EU FP7 grant agreement 602068 Monday 12 September 2016, European Association for the
More informationEvaluating the Strength of Clinical Recommendations in the Medical Literature: GRADE, SORT, and AGREE
Evaluating the Strength of Clinical Recommendations in the Medical Literature: GRADE, SORT, and AGREE Mayra Buainain de Castro Maymone 1, Stephanie D. Gan 2 and Michael Bigby 3 Journal of Investigative
More informationProgress from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI)
Progress from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Anne Beal, Chief Operating Officer of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Sharon-Lise Normand, Vice Chair, Methodology
More informationA Framework for Optimal Cancer Care Pathways in Practice
A to Guide Care Cancer Care A for Care in Practice SUPPORTING CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT IN CANCER CARE Developed by the National Cancer Expert Reference Group to support the early adoption of the A to Guide
More informationEVIDENCE AND RECOMMENDATION GRADING IN GUIDELINES. A short history. Cluzeau Senior Advisor NICE International. G-I-N, Lisbon 2 November 2009
EVIDENCE AND RECOMMENDATION GRADING IN GUIDELINES A short history Françoise Cluzeau Senior Advisor NICE International G-I-N, Lisbon 2 November 2009 Long ago.. Before grading Evidence? Plato (3 rd Century
More informationResults. NeuRA Worldwide incidence April 2016
Introduction The incidence of schizophrenia refers to how many new cases there are per population in a specified time period. It is different from prevalence, which refers to how many existing cases there
More informationTrials and Tribulations of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Trials and Tribulations of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Mark A. Crowther and Deborah J. Cook St. Joseph s Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Systematic
More informationInternational Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use
Final Concept Paper E9(R1): Addendum to Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials on Choosing Appropriate Estimands and Defining Sensitivity Analyses in Clinical Trials dated 22 October 2014 Endorsed
More informationClinical Research Scientific Writing. K. A. Koram NMIMR
Clinical Research Scientific Writing K. A. Koram NMIMR Clinical Research Branch of medical science that determines the safety and effectiveness of medications, devices, diagnostic products and treatment
More informationOnline Annexes (2-4)
Online Annexes (2-4) to WHO Policy update: The use of molecular line probe assays for the detection of resistance to isoniazid and rifampicin THE END TB STRATEGY Online Annexes (2-4) to WHO Policy update:
More informationImproving reporting for observational studies: STROBE statement
Improving reporting for observational studies: STROBE statement Technical meeting on the reporting of human studies submitted for the scientific substantiation of health claims EFSA Parma 20 November 2013
More informationGRADE, Summary of Findings and ConQual Workshop
GRADE, Summary of Findings and ConQual Workshop To discuss Introduction New JBI Levels of Evidence and Grades of Recommendation Moving towards GRADE Summary of Findings tables Qualitative Levels Conclusion
More informationFramework on the feedback of health-related findings in research March 2014
Framework on the feedback of health-related findings in research March 2014 Summary Scope and background In the course of a study involving human participants, researchers may make a finding that has potential
More informationA Framework for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
A Framework for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research David H. Hickam, MD, MPH Director of Research Methodology, PCORI Baltimore, MD August 9, 2016 Session Faculty Disclosures David H. Hickam, MD, MPH No
More informationFamily Support for Children with Disabilities. Guidelines for Demonstrating Effectiveness
Family Support for Children with Disabilities Guidelines for Demonstrating Effectiveness September 2008 Acknowledgements The Family Support for Children with Disabilities Program would like to thank the
More informationJBI GRADE Research School Workshop. Presented by JBI Adelaide GRADE Centre Staff
JBI GRADE Research School Workshop Presented by JBI Adelaide GRADE Centre Staff Declarations of Interest Presented by members of the GRADE Working Group www.gradeworkinggroup.org The Joanna Briggs Institute
More informationWhat is indirect comparison?
...? series New title Statistics Supported by sanofi-aventis What is indirect comparison? Fujian Song BMed MMed PhD Reader in Research Synthesis, Faculty of Health, University of East Anglia Indirect comparison
More informationResults. NeuRA Hypnosis June 2016
Introduction may be experienced as an altered state of consciousness or as a state of relaxation. There is no agreed framework for administering hypnosis, but the procedure often involves induction (such
More informationStandards for the reporting of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews
Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) Standards for the reporting of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews 24 September 2012 Preface The standards below summarize proposed attributes
More informationThese comments are an attempt to summarise the discussions at the manuscript meeting. They are not an exact transcript.
Dear Editor, Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to respond to the peer review comments. Our responses to each comment are below, indicating the nature of corresponding changes made in the revised
More informationPGY1 Learning activities-ebcp Scripts
PGY1 Learning activities-ebcp Scripts Interns will meet in small groups, once per month, to discuss EBCP scripts designed to promote understanding of basic EBCP concepts. EBCP scripts (see example below)
More information'Summary of findings' tables in network meta-analysis (NMA)
'Summary of findings' tables in network meta-analysis (NMA) Juan José Yepes-Nuñez MD, MSc, PhD candidate Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Canada Professor,
More informationACR OA Guideline Development Process Knee and Hip
ACR OA Guideline Development Process Knee and Hip 1. Literature searching frame work Literature searches were developed based on the scenarios. A comprehensive search strategy was used to guide the process
More informationCHAPTER 9 GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER 9 GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS Initially, the prime objective of this study was to assess the anthropometric, vitamin A and iron status in children 6-71 months old
More informationA Case Study: Two-sample categorical data
A Case Study: Two-sample categorical data Patrick Breheny January 31 Patrick Breheny BST 701: Bayesian Modeling in Biostatistics 1/43 Introduction Model specification Continuous vs. mixture priors Choice
More informationCONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial*
CONSORT 2010 checklist of information to include when reporting a randomised trial* Section/Topic Title and abstract Introduction Background and objectives Item No Checklist item 1a Identification as a
More informationISPOR Task Force Report: ITC & NMA Study Questionnaire
INDIRECT TREATMENT COMPARISON / NETWORK META-ANALYSIS STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE TO ASSESS RELEVANCE AND CREDIBILITY TO INFORM HEALTHCARE DECISION-MAKING: AN ISPOR-AMCP-NPC GOOD PRACTICE TASK FORCE REPORT DRAFT
More informationSurviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016 Mitchell M. Levy MD, MCCM Professor of Medicine Chief, Division of Pulmonary, Sleep, and Critical Care
More informationMapping from SORT to GRADE. Brian S. Alper, MD, MSPH, FAAFP Editor-in-Chief, DynaMed October 31, 2013
Mapping from SORT to GRADE Brian S. Alper, MD, MSPH, FAAFP Editor-in-Chief, DynaMed October 31, 2013 Disclosures Brian S. Alper MD, MSPH, FAAFP is editor-in-chief for DynaMed (published by EBSCO) and medical
More informationUsing natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions
Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions Peter Craig MRC Population Health Sciences Research Network Public Health Intervention Research Symposium Toronto, 29-30 November 2010
More informationIntroduzione al metodo GRADE
Introduzione al metodo GRADE Atto Billio MD, MSc EBHC Ematologia e TMO-Bolzano Gruppo linee guida SIE Critique of EBM De-emphasizes patient values Doesn t account for individual variation Devalues clinical
More informationPeer counselling A new element in the ET2020 toolbox
shutterstock Peer counselling A new element in the ET2020 toolbox Information Note. Main characteristics of the peer counselling tool Peer learning in the context of the education cooperation at EU level
More informationStructural Approach to Bias in Meta-analyses
Original Article Received 26 July 2011, Revised 22 November 2011, Accepted 12 December 2011 Published online 2 February 2012 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.52 Structural
More informationTraumatic brain injury
Introduction It is well established that traumatic brain injury increases the risk for a wide range of neuropsychiatric disturbances, however there is little consensus on whether it is a risk factor for
More informationAn evidence-based laboratory medicine approach to evaluate new laboratory tests
Meeting the needs of Mediterranean nations: improving efficiency in laboratory medicine This is a Platinum Open Access Journal distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial
More informationThe evidence system of traditional Chinese medicine based on the Grades of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework
Viewpoint Page 1 of 5 The evidence system of traditional Chinese medicine based on the Grades of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework Hao Chen 1, Yan Wang 2, Wen-Bo Jiang 1,3,
More informationTable 2. Mapping graduate curriculum to Graduate Level Expectations (GDLEs) - MSc (RHBS) program
Depth and breadth of knowledge demonstrate knowledge of the breadth of the field of Rehabilitation Science and within their discipline. demonstrate a sound understanding of the scope, perspectives, concepts,
More informationPUBLIC HEALTH GUIDANCE SCOPE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CLINICAL EXCELLENCE PUBLIC HEALTH GUIDANCE SCOPE 1 Guidance title Behaviour change 1.1 Short title Behaviour change 2 Background a) This is a partial update of The National
More informationResults. NeuRA Motor dysfunction April 2016
Introduction Subtle deviations in various developmental trajectories during childhood and adolescence may foreshadow the later development of schizophrenia. Studies exploring these deviations (antecedents)
More informationIn many healthcare situations, it is common to find
Interpreting and Using Meta-Analysis in Clinical Practice Cheryl Holly Jason T. Slyer Systematic reviews, which can include a meta-analysis, are considered the gold standard for determination of best practice.
More informationUses and misuses of the STROBE statement: bibliographic study
Uses and misuses of the STROBE statement: bibliographic study Bruno R. da Costa 1, Myriam Cevallos 1, 2, Douglas G. Altman 3, Anne W.S. Rutjes 1, Matthias Egger 1 1. Institute of Social & Preventive Medicine
More informationVERDIN MANUSCRIPT REVIEW HISTORY REVISION NOTES FROM AUTHORS (ROUND 2)
1 VERDIN MANUSCRIPT REVIEW HISTORY REVISION NOTES FROM AUTHORS (ROUND 2) Thank you for providing us with the opportunity to revise our paper. We have revised the manuscript according to the editors and
More informationUNIT 5 - Association Causation, Effect Modification and Validity
5 UNIT 5 - Association Causation, Effect Modification and Validity Introduction In Unit 1 we introduced the concept of causality in epidemiology and presented different ways in which causes can be understood
More informationAccess to newly licensed medicines. Scottish Medicines Consortium
Access to newly licensed medicines Scottish Medicines Consortium Modifiers The Committee has previously been provided with information about why the SMC uses modifiers in its appraisal process and also
More informationAlcohol interventions in secondary and further education
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guideline version (Draft for Consultation) Alcohol interventions in secondary and further education NICE guideline: methods NICE guideline Methods
More informationBackground EVM. FAO/WHO technical workshop on nutrient risk assessment, Geneva, May 2005, published 2006.
UK GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION S DISCUSSION PAPER ON THE SETTING OF MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM AMOUNTS FOR VITAMINS AND MINERALS IN FOODSTUFFS. Background The United Kingdom (UK) Government
More informationJanuary 2, Overview
American Statistical Association Position on Statistical Statements for Forensic Evidence Presented under the guidance of the ASA Forensic Science Advisory Committee * January 2, 2019 Overview The American
More informationIssues of validity and reliability in qualitative research
Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research Noble, H., & Smith, J. (2015). Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(2), 34-5. DOI: 10.1136/eb-2015-102054
More informationModule 9 Strategic information
National AIDS Programme Management A Training Course Module 9 Strategic information 2007 WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication data World Health Organization, Regional Office for South-East Asia. National
More informationDRAFT (Final) Concept Paper On choosing appropriate estimands and defining sensitivity analyses in confirmatory clinical trials
DRAFT (Final) Concept Paper On choosing appropriate estimands and defining sensitivity analyses in confirmatory clinical trials EFSPI Comments Page General Priority (H/M/L) Comment The concept to develop
More informationProblem solving therapy
Introduction People with severe mental illnesses such as schizophrenia may show impairments in problem-solving ability. Remediation interventions such as problem solving skills training can help people
More informationInterventions, Effects, and Outcomes in Occupational Therapy
Interventions, Effects, and Outcomes in Occupational Therapy ADULTS AND OLDER ADULTS Instructor s Manual Learning Activities Mary Law, PhD, FCAOT Professor and Associate Dean Rehabilitation Science McMaster
More informationHow to use this appraisal tool: Three broad issues need to be considered when appraising a case control study:
CASP Checklist: 11 questions to help you make sense of a Case Control Study How to use this appraisal tool: Three broad issues need to be considered when appraising a case control study: Are the results
More informationAssignment 4: True or Quasi-Experiment
Assignment 4: True or Quasi-Experiment Objectives: After completing this assignment, you will be able to Evaluate when you must use an experiment to answer a research question Develop statistical hypotheses
More informationMeta-analysis of safety thoughts from CIOMS X
CIOMS Working Group X Meta-analysis of safety thoughts from CIOMS X Stephen.Evans@Lshtm.ac.uk Improving health worldwide www.lshtm.ac.uk Evans: ENCePP CIOMS Meta Analysis 1 Acknowledgements, conflicts,
More informationIncorporating qualitative research into guideline development: the way forward
11 Dec 2015, Baveno Incorporating qualitative research into guideline development: the way forward Ӧzge Tunçalp, MD PhD Department of Reproductive Health and Research 1 Outline WHO guideline processes
More informationStudent Social Worker (End of Second Placement) Professional Capabilities Framework Evidence
Student Social Worker (End of Second Placement) Professional Capabilities Framework Evidence Source information: https://www.basw.co.uk/pcf/capabilities/?level=7&domain=9#start Domain Areas to consider:
More informationResults. NeuRA Mindfulness and acceptance therapies August 2018
Introduction involve intentional and non-judgmental focus of one's attention on emotions, thoughts and sensations that are occurring in the present moment. The aim is to open awareness to present experiences,
More informationCHAMP: CHecklist for the Appraisal of Moderators and Predictors
CHAMP - Page 1 of 13 CHAMP: CHecklist for the Appraisal of Moderators and Predictors About the checklist In this document, a CHecklist for the Appraisal of Moderators and Predictors (CHAMP) is presented.
More informationAccepted refereed manuscript of:
Accepted refereed manuscript of: Zwarenstein M, Treweek S & Loudon K (2017) PRECIS-2 helps researchers design more applicable RCTs while CONSORT Extension for Pragmatic Trials helps knowledge users decide
More informationEssential Skills for Evidence-based Practice Understanding and Using Systematic Reviews
J Nurs Sci Vol.28 No.4 Oct - Dec 2010 Essential Skills for Evidence-based Practice Understanding and Using Systematic Reviews Jeanne Grace Corresponding author: J Grace E-mail: Jeanne_Grace@urmc.rochester.edu
More informationWebinar 3 Systematic Literature Review: What you Need to Know
Webinar 3 Systematic Literature Review: What you Need to Know Camille Kolotylo RN, PhD Andrea Baumann RN, PhD Nursing Health Services Research Unit (NHSRU) McMaster University Date: Thursday May 29, 2014
More informationHICPAC Recommendation Categorization Update Workgroup: Public Comment Summary and Finalization
HICPAC Categorization Update Workgroup: Public Comment Summary and Finalization Deborah Yokoe and Daniel Diekema, Workgroup Co-Chairs HICPAC Presentation, November 2018 Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions
More informationMedicare Physician Fee Schedule Final Rule for CY 2018 Appropriate Use Criteria for Advanced Diagnostic Imaging Services Summary
Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Final Rule for CY 2018 Appropriate Use Criteria for Advanced Diagnostic Imaging Services Summary Background and Overview The Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 included
More informationCriteria for evaluating transferability of health interventions: a systematic review and thematic synthesis
Schloemer and Schröder-Bäck Implementation Science (2018) 13:88 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0751-8 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Open Access Criteria for evaluating transferability of health interventions:
More information1. Draft checklist for judging on quality of animal studies (Van der Worp et al., 2010)
Appendix C Quality appraisal tools (QATs) 1. Draft checklist for judging on quality of animal studies (Van der Worp et al., 2010) 2. NICE Checklist for qualitative studies (2012) 3. The Critical Appraisal
More information1 The conceptual underpinnings of statistical power
1 The conceptual underpinnings of statistical power The importance of statistical power As currently practiced in the social and health sciences, inferential statistics rest solidly upon two pillars: statistical
More informationINTRODUCTION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES The Operations Manual is intended for use in countries with high HIV prevalence and provides operational guidance on delivering HIV services at health centres.
More informationContent. Evidence-based Geriatric Medicine. Evidence-based Medicine is: Why is EBM Needed? 10/8/2008. Evidence-based Medicine (EBM)
Content Evidence-based Geriatric Medicine Patricia P. Barry, MD, MPH Review of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and evidence-based practice (EBP) Use of guidelines in evidence-based practice Relevance of
More informationBIOLOGY. The range and suitability of the work submitted
Overall grade boundaries BIOLOGY Grade: E D C B A Mark range: 0-7 8-15 16-22 23-28 29-36 The range and suitability of the work submitted In this session essays were submitted in a wide range of appropriate
More informationComparative Effectiveness Research Collaborative Initiative (CER-CI) PART 1: INTERPRETING OUTCOMES RESEARCH STUDIES FOR HEALTH CARE DECISION MAKERS
Comparative Effectiveness Research Collaborative Initiative (CER-CI) PART 1: INTERPRETING OUTCOMES RESEARCH STUDIES FOR HEALTH CARE DECISION MAKERS HEALTH EVIDENCE FOR DECISION MAKING: ASSESSMENT TOOL
More informationResults. NeuRA Family relationships May 2017
Introduction Familial expressed emotion involving hostility, emotional over-involvement, and critical comments has been associated with increased psychotic relapse in people with schizophrenia, so these
More informationAnimal-assisted therapy
Introduction Animal-assisted interventions use trained animals to help improve physical, mental and social functions in people with schizophrenia. It is a goal-directed intervention in which an animal
More informationBusiness Plan. July 2016 to June Trusted evidence. Informed decisions. Better health.
Business Plan July 2016 to June 2017 Trusted evidence. Informed decisions. Better health. Business Plan for Cochrane Australia (2016-2017) 2 Cochrane vision Our vision is a world of improved health where
More informationAudit report of published abstracts and Summary of findings tables
Audit report of published abstracts and Summary of findings tables Abstract Screening Checklist Document prepared by: Access: Purpose of the paper: Decision required: Urgency: Resource implications: David
More informationTo evaluate a single epidemiological article we need to know and discuss the methods used in the underlying study.
Critical reading 45 6 Critical reading As already mentioned in previous chapters, there are always effects that occur by chance, as well as systematic biases that can falsify the results in population
More informationINTRODUCTION. Evidence standards for justifiable evidence claims, June 2016
EVIDENCE STANDARDS: A DIMENSIONS OF DIFFERENCE FRAMEWORK FOR APPRAISING JUSTIFIABLE EVIDENCE CLAIMS 1 David Gough, EPPI-Centre, SSRU, UCL Institute of Education, University College London INTRODUCTION
More information