The GRADE Working Group clarifies the construct of certainty of evidence
- PMID: 28529184
- PMCID: PMC6542664
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.006
The GRADE Working Group clarifies the construct of certainty of evidence
Abstract
Objective: To clarify the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) definition of certainty of evidence and suggest possible approaches to rating certainty of the evidence for systematic reviews, health technology assessments, and guidelines.
Study design and setting: This work was carried out by a project group within the GRADE Working Group, through brainstorming and iterative refinement of ideas, using input from workshops, presentations, and discussions at GRADE Working Group meetings to produce this document, which constitutes official GRADE guidance.
Results: Certainty of evidence is best considered as the certainty that a true effect lies on one side of a specified threshold or within a chosen range. We define possible approaches for choosing threshold or range. For guidelines, what we call a fully contextualized approach requires simultaneously considering all critical outcomes and their relative value. Less-contextualized approaches, more appropriate for systematic reviews and health technology assessments, include using specified ranges of magnitude of effect, for example, ranges of what we might consider no effect, trivial, small, moderate, or large effects.
Conclusion: It is desirable for systematic review authors, guideline panelists, and health technology assessors to specify the threshold or ranges they are using when rating the certainty in evidence.
Keywords: Certainty of evidence; GRADE; Guidelines; Health technology assessment; Systematic reviews; Thresholds.
Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Figures
Comment in
-
The construct of certainty of evidence has not been disseminated to systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines; response to 'The GRADE Working Group' et al.J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Jul;147:171-172. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.03.013. Epub 2022 Mar 24. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022. PMID: 35341947 No abstract available.
References
-
- Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):401–6. - PubMed
-
- Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, Rind D, et al. GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence--imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(12):1283–93. - PubMed
-
- Schunemann HJ. Interpreting GRADE's levels of certainty or quality of the evidence: GRADE for statisticians, considering review information size or less emphasis on imprecision? J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75:6–15. - PubMed
-
- Schunemann HJ. Guidelines 2.0: do no net harm-the future of practice guideline development in asthma and other diseases. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2011;11(3):261–8. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
