GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations

Guyatt, GH; Oxman, AD; Vist, GE; Kunz, R; Falck-Ytter, Y; Alonso-Coello, P; Schünemann, HJ

HERO ID

783306

Reference Type

Journal Article

Year

2008

Language

English

PMID

18436948

HERO ID 783306
In Press No
Year 2008
Title GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Authors Guyatt, GH; Oxman, AD; Vist, GE; Kunz, R; Falck-Ytter, Y; Alonso-Coello, P; Schünemann, HJ
Journal BMJ (Clinical Research Edition)
Volume 336
Issue 7650
Page Numbers 924-926
Abstract Guideline developers around the world are inconsistent in how they rate quality of evidence and grade strength of recommendations. As a result, guideline users face challenges in understanding the messages that grading systems try to communicate. Since 2006 the BMJ has requested in its “Instructions to Authors” on bmj.com that authors should preferably use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system for grading evidence when submitting a clinical guidelines article. What was behind this decision? In this first in a series of five articles we will explain why many organisations use formal systems to grade evidence and recommendations and why this is important for clinicians; we will focus on the GRADE approach to recommendations. In the next two articles we will examine how the GRADE system categorises quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. The final two articles will focus on recommendations for diagnostic tests and GRADE’s framework for tackling the impact of interventions on use of resources. GRADE has advantages over previous rating systems. Other systems share some of these advantages, but none, other than GRADE, combines them all.
Doi 10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD
Pmid 18436948
Url http://www.bmj.com/content/336/7650/924.full
Is Certified Translation No
Dupe Override No
Comments Journal: Brit Med J ISSN:
Is Public Yes
Language Text English