GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations - Concepedia

Concepedia

Abstract

Guidelines are inconsistent in how they rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. This article explores the advantages of the GRADE system, which is increasingly being adopted by organisations worldwide

References

	Year	Citations
Risks and Benefits of Estrogen Plus Progestin in Healthy Postmenopausal Women: Principal Results From the Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Trial JAMA	2002	15.7K
Randomized Trial of Estrogen Plus Progestin for Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in Postmenopausal Women Stephen B. Hulley JAMA	1998	6.2K
Mortality and Morbidity in Patients Receiving Encainide, Flecainide, or Placebo Debra S. Echt, Philip R. Liebson, L. Brent Mitchell, New England Journal of Medicine	1991	3.2K
A Comparison of Results of Meta-analyses of Randomized Control Trials and Recommendations of Clinical Experts Elliott M. Antman JAMA	1992	1.5K
Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group David C. Atkins, Martin Eccles, Signe Flottorp, BMC Health Services Research	2004	1.2K
Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Jennifer Kleinbart, Mark V. Williams Evidence-Based Mental Health	2002	354
A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction Elliott M. Antman JAMA PharmacotherapyPreventive CardiologyCoronary Artery DiseaseAcute Myocardial InfarctionClinical Trials	1992	210
Aspirin and Reye Syndrome Vincent A. Fulginiti, Philip A. Brunell, James D. Cherry, PEDIATRICS Clinical FindingCardiovascular DiseasePediatric EpidemiologyMedicineAdverse Drug Reaction	1982	91

Page 1