Challenge of communicating uncertainty in systematic reviews when applying GRADE ratings
Anttila, Sten LU ; Persson, Johannes LU
; Vareman, Niklas
LU
and Sahlin, Nils-Eric
LU
(2018)
In Evidence-Based Medicine
- Abstract
- One of the most widely used tools for assessing and communicating scienti c uncertainty is Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), a system for rating the quality of evidence and grading strength of recommendations in healthcare. More than 100 organisations around the world—WHO included1— are using GRADE or have endorsed it.
In GRADE, a quantitative assessment of uncertainty is qualitatively communicated, so that a result obtained as a CI relative to a threshold is expressed as a nding in which assessors have low, moderate or high certainty, or certainty described with other such quali ers. What these correspond to in quantitative terms, and how decision-makers interpret them, is our issue here. We... (More) - One of the most widely used tools for assessing and communicating scienti c uncertainty is Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), a system for rating the quality of evidence and grading strength of recommendations in healthcare. More than 100 organisations around the world—WHO included1— are using GRADE or have endorsed it.
In GRADE, a quantitative assessment of uncertainty is qualitatively communicated, so that a result obtained as a CI relative to a threshold is expressed as a nding in which assessors have low, moderate or high certainty, or certainty described with other such quali ers. What these correspond to in quantitative terms, and how decision-makers interpret them, is our issue here. We con ne our attention to GRADE’s decision rules for systematic reviews, and do not comment on the problem of multiple outcomes in guideline recommendations. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/26545816-c6dc-4ee7-9f2c-e01689a31d71
- author
- Anttila, Sten
LU
; Persson, Johannes
LU
; Vareman, Niklas
LU
and Sahlin, Nils-Eric
LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2018-04-12
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Evidence-Based Medicine
- publisher
- BMJ Publishing Group
- external identifiers
-
- pmid:29650722
- scopus:85049212451
- ISSN
- 1356-5524
- DOI
- 10.1136/bmjebm-2018-110894
- project
- Science and Proven Experience
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 26545816-c6dc-4ee7-9f2c-e01689a31d71
- date added to LUP
- 2018-03-15 19:42:13
- date last changed
- 2022-09-23 03:23:49
@misc{26545816-c6dc-4ee7-9f2c-e01689a31d71,
abstract = {{One of the most widely used tools for assessing and communicating scienti c uncertainty is Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), a system for rating the quality of evidence and grading strength of recommendations in healthcare. More than 100 organisations around the world—WHO included1— are using GRADE or have endorsed it.<br/>In GRADE, a quantitative assessment of uncertainty is qualitatively communicated, so that a result obtained as a CI relative to a threshold is expressed as a nding in which assessors have low, moderate or high certainty, or certainty described with other such quali ers. What these correspond to in quantitative terms, and how decision-makers interpret them, is our issue here. We con ne our attention to GRADE’s decision rules for systematic reviews, and do not comment on the problem of multiple outcomes in guideline recommendations.}},
author = {{Anttila, Sten and Persson, Johannes and Vareman, Niklas and Sahlin, Nils-Eric}},
issn = {{1356-5524}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{04}},
publisher = {{BMJ Publishing Group}},
series = {{Evidence-Based Medicine}},
title = {{Challenge of communicating uncertainty in systematic reviews when applying GRADE ratings}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/41501321/bmjebm_2018_110894.full.pdf}},
doi = {{10.1136/bmjebm-2018-110894}},
year = {{2018}},
}