GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence.
By G. Guyatt, Andrew D. Oxman, S. Sultan, P. Glasziou, Elie A. Akl, P. Alonso-Coello, D. Atkins, Regina Kunz, J. Brożek, Victor M. Montori and 10 more. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2011
1,187 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Statistics and Probability, Surgery
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d1c5ab804ef2cf928572621ff649bce01628a608
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
In Statistics and Probability
In Surgery
Citations in the corpus
- New evidence pyramid (2016, methodology): “quality of this evidence is rated up despite the study design (non-randomised observational studies).(10) Therefore, the first modification to the pyramid is to change the straight lines separating study designs in the pyramid to wavy lines (going up and down to reflect the GRADE approach of rating ”
- Systematic review of the relationships between physical activity and health indicators in the early years (0-4 years) (2017, background): “Since dose-response evidence could not be determined for cross-sectional studies, observations of a gradient of higher exposure with higher/ lower outcome were considered a reason to upgrade the quality of evidence associated with this study design [29].”
- Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis (LCH): Guidelines for Diagnosis, Clinical Work-Up, and Treatment for Patients Till the Age of 18 Years (2012, neutral): “Evidence was ranked in four levels [1,2]: (A) meta-analyses, high quality systematic reviews, or randomized controlled trials with a low risk of bias; (B) systematic reviews of case–control or cohort studies; (C) non-analytic studies; for example, case reports, case series, small retrospective studi”
- Systematic review of the relationships between objectively measured physical activity and health indicators in school-aged children and youth. (2016, methodology): “If there is no cause to downgrade, the quality of evidence can be upgraded if there is a large effect size, a dose–response gradient, or if all plausible confounders would decrease an apparent treatment effect (Guyatt et al. 2011b).”
- Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Youth: An Integration of Physical Activity, Sedentary Behaviour, and Sleep. (2016, methodology): “The guideline development procedures used here followed comprehensive, rigorous, and transparent processes (Brouwers et al. 2010a; Guyatt et al. 2011; Tremblay and Haskell 2012) incorporating systematic review findings, consultation findings, compositional analysis findings, and expert,…”