GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables.

By G. Guyatt, Andrew D. Oxman, Elie A. Akl, Regina Kunz, G. Vist, J. Brożek, S. Norris, Y. Falck-Ytter, P. Glasziou, H. DeBeer and 5 more. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2011

9,069 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ebef8c031201cef996beca0c4fe574b783956c3a

How researchers see this paper

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

In Economics and Econometrics

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prophylaxis for hospitalized and nonhospitalized medical patients. (2018, methodology): “The certainty was categorized into 4 levels ranging from very low to high.(14-16)”
American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. (2020, methodology): “We made judgments regarding risk of bias, precision, consistency, directness, and likelihood of publication bias and categorized the certainty in the evidence into 4 levels ranging from very low to high.(22,23) In addition, we conducted systematic searches to identify evidence related to baseline ri”
Using Qualitative Evidence in Decision Making for Health and Social Interventions: An Approach to Assess Confidence in Findings from Qualitative Evidence Syntheses (GRADE-CERQual) (2015, background): “Such assessments of findings from reviews of effectiveness are a critical component of developing recommendations on health care interventions [10].”
Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses (2024, neutral): “38”
GRADE guidelines: 13. Preparing summary of findings tables and evidence profiles-continuous outcomes. (2013, neutral): “The first 12 articles in this series introduced the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to systematic reviews and guideline development [1], discussed the framing of the question [2], presented GRADE’s concept of quality of evidence and how to apply it”
Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool: a modified e-Delphi study. (2019, methodology): “Several approaches for rating the overall quality of evidence have been developed, such as Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) [38] and GRADE-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) [39].”
A tool to assess risk of bias in non-randomized follow-up studies of exposure effects (ROBINS-E) (2024, positive): “An example of such a framework is the GRADE approach (Guyatt et al., 2011) where users may start at high certainty in the “study limitations” (risk of bias) domain of GRADE and use their ROBINS-E evaluation to determine how many levels to rate down this certainty (Schunemann et al., 2018).”
COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (2018, background): “, risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness) to moderate, low, or very low when there is risk of bias (low study quality), (unexplained) inconsistency in results, or indirect results [44].”
Diagnostic criteria and classification of hyperglycaemia first detected in pregnancy: a World Health Organization Guideline. (2014, methodology): “This is because GRADE methodology is designed for assessment of interventions and currently does not cover disease classification based on risk or prognosis [5].”
Endoscopic biliary stenting: indications, choice of stents, and results: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline – Updated October 2017 (2018, methodology): “The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendation and the quality of evidence [3, 4].”