GRADE guidelines : 19. assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-risk of bias and indirectness
Ver / Descargar
Fecha
2019-07Autor(es)
Zhang, YuanAlonso-Coello, Pablo
Guyatt, Gordon H.
Yepes-Nuñez, Juan José
Akl, Elie A.
Hazlewood, Glen
Pardo-Hernandez, Hector
Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta, Itziar
Qaseem, Amir
Williams Jr., John W.
Tugwell, Peter
Flottorp, Signe
Chang, Yaping
Zhang, Yuqing
Mustafa, Reem A.
Schünemann, Holger J.
Rojas-Reyes, Maria Ximena
Autor(es) Corporativo(s)
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Facultad de Medicina. Departamento de Epidemiología Clínica y Bioestadística
Tipo
Artículo de revista
ISSN
0895-4356 / 1878-5921 (Electrónico)
Páginas
94-104
Compartir este registro
Citación
Documentos PDF
Abstract
Objectives The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) working group defines patient values and preferences as the relative importance patients place on the main health outcomes. We provide GRADE guidance for assessing the risk of bias and indirectness domains for certainty of evidence about the relative importance of outcomes.
Study Design and Setting We applied the GRADE domains to rate the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes to several systematic reviews, iteratively reviewed draft guidance and consulted GRADE members and other stakeholders for feedback. Results This is the first of two articles. A body of evidence addressing the importance of outcomes starts at “high certainty”; concerns with risk of bias, indirectness, inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias lead to downgrading to moderate, low, or very low certainty. We propose subdomains of risk of bias as selection of the study population, missing data, the type of measurement instrument, and confounding; we have developed items for each subdomain. The population, intervention, comparison, and outcome elements associated with the evidence determine the degree of indirectness. Conclusion This article provides guidance and examples for rating the risk of bias and indirectness for a body of evidence summarizing the importance of outcomes.
Keywords
GRADEQuality of evidence
Importance of outcomes
Value and preference
Risk of bias
Indirectness
Enlace al recurso
https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(17)31036-3/fulltextFuente
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Vol. 111 (2019)
Estadísticas Google Analytics
Colecciones
- Artículos [682]