1 / 21

EAST GRADE course 2019 Creating Recommendations

Learn how to create strong recommendations in medical research, including determining strength, rating evidence, and considering patient values. Understand the implications of recommendations for patients, clinicians, and policymakers.

lashawn
Download Presentation

EAST GRADE course 2019 Creating Recommendations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EAST GRADE course 2019Creating Recommendations John R. Lunde, DNP, AGACNP-BC, TCRN, FCCM George Kasotakis, MD MPH FACS FCCM

  2. Defined • The strength of a recommendation reflects the extent to which we can be confident that the desirable effects of an intervention outweigh the undesirable effects.” • The implications of recommendations have clinical and medico-legal effects.

  3. Making a Recommendation • Determining the strength of a recommendation is separate and different from rating the quality of the evidence.

  4. The Primary Rating Determinants: • The overall quality of the evidence across outcomes (critical outcomes first) • The balance between benefits and harms and burden • Patient values and preferences • Resource considerations • Acceptability / feasibility

  5. Grade Level of Action Strength • Strong Recommendation • Used when the desirable effects of adherence to a recommendation clearly outweighs the undesirable effects, or clearly do not • We recommend using the phrase “we recommend” or “we recommend against”

  6. Weak (conditional) recommendation • Used when the tradeoffs are less certain either because of low-quality evidence or when the available evidence suggests that the desirable and undesirable effects are closely balanced; or patients values and preferences vary widely or are uncertain; or the resource used involved may bot be worth in relation to the benefit achieved.

  7. Weak cont. • We recommend using the phrase “we conditionally recommend” or “we conditionally recommend against” when a weak recommendation is warrented

  8. Tips on Making Recommendations • Covert the PICO Question into an affirmative statement • For strong- use “recommend” or ”recommend against” • For weak- use “conditionally recommend” or “conditionally recommend against”

  9. What contributes to the strength of a recommendation • Quality of the evidence • Uncertainty or variability in the values and preferences • Uncertainty about whether the intervention represents a wise use of resources • Balance between desirable and undesirable effects

  10. Implications of Recommendation • The implication of a strong recommendation are: • Patients • Clinicians • Policy Makers • It essentially dictates the new standard of care

  11. The implications of a weak recommendation are: • Patients • Clinicians • Policy Makers • It implies the intervention should be considered in the majority of clinically applicable situations

  12. Questions

  13. EAST GRADE course 2019Drafting the Manuscript John R. Lunde, DNP, AGACNP-BC, TCRN, FCCM George Kasotakis, MD MPH FACS FCCM

  14. Overall Approach • JOT limits manuscripts to 5000 words • Structured abstract is limited to 300 words • Limited to 8 figures and tables which include “Summary of Recommendations” figure

  15. Format • Title • Abstract • Introduction: Discuss the magnitude of the problem; known data; knowledge gap; aim of the project • Objectives: What you set out to accomplish

  16. Methods • Identification of Resources – Literature Search: • How the lit search was conducted, what engines, what terms • Include Prisma flow chart! • Outcome Measure Types • What Outcomes were considered, how they were rated • Data Extraction and Methodology • How abstracts/full manuscripts were reviewed, how conflicts were adjudicated, how data points were extracted

  17. Results for PICO #1 • Qualitative Synthesis • Discuss differences across analyzed manuscripts, how these may affect your recommendation. Comment on notable observations, specific subpopulations that may benefit more or less from the proposed intervention. • Quantitative Synthesis: • Review / Discuss the Meta-Analysis results, present the GRADE Pro table findings.

  18. Results for PICO #1 • Grading the Evidence • Present Grade Pro table, discuss results, evaluate overall quality of evidence. • Recommendation: • State the final recommendation as an answer to your PICO. ”Based on ____ quality of evidence”. • Discuss positive outcomes that improve, and adverse outcomes that may decrease • Discuss specific circumstances, pt populations where it may be more or less applicable.

  19. Repeat Results for PICO #2 • Repeat: • Qualitative Synthesis • Quantitative Synthesis • Grading the Evidence • Recommendation

  20. Summary of Recommendations • Using These Guidelines in Clinical Practice: • Discuss in more detail what benefits are to be expected from application of the recommendations. • Reiterate any exclusions/populations that may benefit more or less from the proposed intervention • Conclusion • Reiterate your recommendations & the clinical setting where they may most be applicable • Summary of Recommendations • Table with recommendations per PICO

  21. Questions

More Related