GRADE guidelines 26: Informative statements to communicate the findings of systematic reviews of interventions.

By N. Santesso, C. Glenton, P. Dahm, P. Garner, Elie A. Akl, B. Alper, R. Brignardello-Petersen, A. Carrasco-Labra, H. de Beer, M. Hultcrantz and 9 more. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2019

898 citations recorded by the source corpus.

OBJECTIVES Clear communication of systematic review findings will help readers and decision makers. We built on previous work to develop an approach that improves the clarity of statements to convey findings and that draws on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We conducted workshops including 80 attendants and a survey of 110 producers and users of systematic reviews. We calculated acceptability of statements and revised the wording of those that were unacceptable to ≥40% of participants. RESULTS Most participants agreed statements should be based on size of effect and certainty of evidence. Statements for low, moderate and high certainty evidence were acceptable to >60%. Key guidance, for example, includes statements for high, moderate and low certainty for a large effect on intervention x as: x results in a large reduction…; x likely results in a large reduction…; x may result in a large reduction…, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Producers and users of systematic reviews found statements to communicate findings combining size and certainty of an effect acceptable. This article provides GRADE guidance and a wording template to formulate statements in systematic reviews and other decision tools.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/39f3f564409252452bf5bc1067c2b58813aaeca1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

M. Davies
P. Rossing
G. Mingrone
C. Mathieu
John B. Buse
R. Gabbay
Jennifer B. Green
N. Maruthur

Citations in the corpus

Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2022. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). (2022, methodology): “Evidence appraisal was informed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines on the formulation of clinical practice recommendations (9,10).”
Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2022. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) (2022, neutral): “Evidence appraisal was informed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines on the formulation of clinical practice recommenda t ions [9 , 10] .”