110 likes | 212 Views
Considerations in grading a recommendation. methodological quality of evidence likelihood of bias trade-off between benefits and risks. Methodological quality specific to an outcome. benefits often have RCTS risks often limited to observational studies. Possible levels of quality.
E N D
Considerations in grading a recommendation • methodological quality of evidence • likelihood of bias • trade-off between benefits and risks
Methodological quality specific to an outcome • benefits • often have RCTS • risks • often limited to observational studies
Possible levels of quality • strong • intermediate • weak • very weak
Quality of evidence,Where to start? • basic study design • randomized trials • strong evidence • observational studies • weak evidence
Downgrading quality,weak implementation • detailed design and execution • concealment • balance in known prognostic factors • intention to treat principle observed • blinding • completeness of follow-up
Downgrading qualityinconsistency • evidence weaker if results differ from study to study • subjective judgement • you will be told
Downgrading quality, indirectness • indirect treatment comparisons • interested in A versus B • have A versus C and B versus C • different patient population • different intervention • different outcome
Downgrading quality, reporting bias, sparse data • what if you have a biased sample of studies? • publication bias • what if one study with 10 people?
What can increase strength of evidence? • large association can upgrade • very large, 2 levels • large with no plausible confounders, 1 level • dose-response gradient • can upgrade one level
Grade of Recommendations • do it or don’t do it • strong recommendation • probably do it, or probably don’t • weaker recommendation
Risk/Benefit tradeoff • seriousness of outcome • magnitude of effect • precision of treatment effect • risk of target event • risk of adverse events • cost of therapy • values and preferences