Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2010 Aug;10(4):358-63.
doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.10-4-358.

A review of grading systems for evidence-based guidelines produced by medical specialties

Affiliations
Review

A review of grading systems for evidence-based guidelines produced by medical specialties

Adrian Baker et al. Clin Med (Lond). 2010 Aug.

Abstract

The development of evidence-based guidelines requires scrupulous attention to the method of critical appraisal. Many critical appraisal systems give 'gold standard' status to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) due to their ability to limit bias. While guidelines with a prominent research base consisting of RCTs have been well served by such systems, specialist societies with research bases consisting of a wide range of study designs have been at a disadvantage, potentially leading to inappropriately low grades being given for recommendations. A review of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, the Graphic Appraisal Tool for Epidemiology and the National Service Framework for Long Term Conditions grading systems was therefore undertaken. A matrix was developed suggesting the optimum grading system for the type of guideline being developed or question being addressed by a specialist society.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1.
Fig 1.
The Graphic Appraisal Tool for Epidemiology (GATE) framework. (Reproduced from Annals of Internal Medicine with permission).

References

    1. Royal College of Physicians' Clinical Effectiveness Forum . www.rcplondon.ac.uk/clinical-standards/organisation/partnership/Pages/jo....
    1. Baker A, Young K, Potter J, Madan I. A review of grading systems and critical appraisal tools for use by specialist medical societies developing evidence-based guidelines. NHS Plus, 2009.
    1. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network SIGN 50. A guideline developer's handbook. Edinburgh: SIGN, 2008.
    1. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strengths of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328:1490–7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Guyatt G, Vist G, Ytter-Falck Y, et al. An emerging consensus on grading recommendations?. ACP J Club 2006;144:A8–9.10.1136/ebm.11.1.2-a - DOI - PubMed

Publication types