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

Gordon Guyatt(McMaster University), Andrew D Oxman(Nasjonalt Kunnskapssenter for Helsetjenesten), Gunn Elisabeth Vist(Nasjonalt Kunnskapssenter for Helsetjenesten), Regina Kunz(University Hospital of Basel), Yngve Falck–Ytter(Case Western Reserve University), Pablo Alonso‐Coello(Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre), Holger J. Schünemann
BMJ
April 24, 2008
10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.ad
Cited by 21,752Open Access
Full Text

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

Related Papers

Risks and Benefits of Estrogen Plus Progestin in Healthy Postmenopausal Women: Principal Results From the Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Trial
Writing Group for the Women's Health Initiative Investigators|JAMA|2002|15.8k
Randomized Trial of Estrogen Plus Progestin for Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in Postmenopausal Women
Stephen B. Hulley|JAMA|1998|6.3k
Mortality and Morbidity in Patients Receiving Encainide, Flecainide, or Placebo
Debra S. Echt, Philip R. Liebson, L. Brent Mitchell et al.|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 et al.|BMC Health Services Research|2004|1.2k