UpToDate adherence to GRADE criteria for strong recommendations: an analytical survey

被引:27
作者
Agoritsas, Thomas [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Merglen, Arnaud [4 ]
Heen, Anja Fog [5 ]
Kristiansen, Annette [5 ]
Neumann, Ignacio [3 ,6 ]
Brito, Juan P. [7 ,8 ]
Brignardello-Petersen, Romina [3 ,9 ]
Alexander, Paul E. [3 ]
Rind, David M. [10 ]
Vandvik, Per O. [5 ,11 ]
Guyatt, Gordon H. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Geneva, Div Gen Internal Med, Dept Internal Med Rehabil & Geriatr, Geneva, Switzerland
[2] Univ Hosp Geneva, Div Clin Epidemiol, Geneva, Switzerland
[3] McMaster Univ, Dept Hlth Res Methods Evidence & Impact, Fac Hlth Sci, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Geneva, Univ Hosp Geneva, Fac Med, Div Gen Pediat, Geneva, Switzerland
[5] Innlandet Hosp Trust, Div Gjovik, Dept Internal Med, Gjovik, Norway
[6] Pontificia Univ Catolica Chile, Dept Internal Med, Santiago, Chile
[7] Mayo Clin, Div Endocrinol Diabet Metab & Nutr, Dept Med, Rochester, MN USA
[8] Mayo Clin, Knowledge & Evaluat Res Unit, Rochester, MN USA
[9] Univ Chile, Fac Dent, Santiago, Chile
[10] Inst Clin & Econ Review, Boston, MA USA
[11] Univ Oslo, Inst Hlth & Soc, Fac Med, Oslo, Norway
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2017年 / 7卷 / 11期
关键词
CLINICAL-PRACTICE GUIDELINES; STRENGTH; CONFIDENCE; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018593
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction UpToDate is widely used by clinicians worldwide and includes more than 9400 recommendations that apply the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. GRADE guidance warns against strong recommendations when certainty of the evidence is low or very low (discordant recommendations) but has identified five paradigmatic situations in which discordant recommendations may be justified. Objectives Our objective was to document the strength of recommendations in UpToDate and assess the frequency and appropriateness of discordant recommendations. Design Analytical survey of all recommendations in UpToDate. Methods We identified all GRADE recommendations in UpToDate and examined their strength (strong or weak) and certainty of the evidence (high, moderate or low certainty). We identified all discordant recommendations as of January 2015, and pairs of reviewers independently classified them either into one of the five appropriate paradigms or into one of three categories inconsistent with GRADE guidance, based on the evidence presented in UpToDate. Results UpToDate included 9451 GRADE recommendations, of which 6501 (68.8%) were formulated as weak recommendations and 2950 (31.2%) as strong. Among the strong, 844 (28.6%) were based on high certainty in effect estimates, 1740 (59.0%) on moderate certainty and 366 (12.4%) on low certainty. Of the 349 discordant recommendations 204 (58.5%) were judged appropriately (consistent with one of the five paradigms); we classified 47 (13.5%) as good practice statements; 38 (10.9%) misclassified the evidence as low certainty when it was at least moderate and 60 (17.2%) warranted a weak rather than a strong recommendation. Conclusion The proportion of discordant recommendations in UpToDate is small (3.7% of all recommendations) and the proportion that is truly problematic (strong recommendations that would best have been weak) is very small (0.6%). Clinicians should nevertheless be cautious and look for clear explanations-in UpToDate and elsewhere-when guidelines offer strong recommendations based on low certainty evidence.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 27 条
  • [1] Agoritsas T, 2015, JAMA USERS GUIDES ME
  • [2] Guideline conflict of interest management and methodology heavily impacts on the strength of recommendations: comparison between two iterations of the American College of Chest Physicians Antithrombotic Guidelines
    Agoritsas, Thomas
    Neumann, Ignacio
    Mendoza, Carolina
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2017, 81 : 141 - 143
  • [3] SPOTLIGHT: PATIENT CENTRED CARE Decision aids that really promote shared decision making: the pace quickens
    Agoritsas, Thomas
    Heen, Anja Fog
    Brandt, Linn
    Alonso-Coello, Pablo
    Kristiansen, Annette
    Akl, Elie A.
    Neumann, Ignacio
    Tikkinen, Kari A. O.
    van der Weijden, Trudy
    Elwyn, Glyn
    Montori, Victor M.
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    Vandvik, Per Olav
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2015, 350
  • [4] Senior GRADE methodologists encounter challenges as part of WHO guideline development panels: an inductive content analysis
    Alexander, Paul E.
    Li, Shelly-Anne
    Gionfriddo, Michael R.
    Stoltzfus, Rebecca J.
    Neumann, Ignacio
    Brito, Juan P.
    Djulbegovic, Benjamin
    Montori, Victor M.
    Schuenemann, Holger J.
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2016, 70 : 123 - 128
  • [5] A number of factors explain why WHO guideline developers make strong recommendations inconsistent with GRADE guidance
    Alexander, Paul E.
    Gionfriddo, Michael R.
    Li, Shelly-Anne
    Bero, Lisa
    Stoltzfus, Rebecca J.
    Neumann, Ignacio
    Brito, Juan P.
    Djulbegovic, Benjamin
    Montori, Victor M.
    Norris, Susan L.
    Schuenemann, Holger J.
    Thabane, Lehana
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2016, 70 : 111 - 122
  • [6] World Health Organization strong recommendations based on low-quality evidence (study quality) are frequent and often inconsistent with GRADE guidance
    Alexander, Paul E.
    Brito, Juan P.
    Neumann, Ignacio
    Gionfriddo, Michael R.
    Bero, Lisa
    Djulbegovic, Benjamin
    Stoltzfus, Rebecca
    Montori, Victor M.
    Norris, Susan L.
    Schuenemann, Holger J.
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2016, 72 : 98 - 106
  • [7] World Health Organization recommendations are often strong based on low confidence in effect estimates
    Alexander, Paul E.
    Bero, Lisa
    Montori, Victor M.
    Brito, Juan Pablo
    Stoltzfus, Rebecca
    Djulbegovic, Benjamin
    Neumann, Ignacio
    Rave, Supriya
    Guyatt, Gordon
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2014, 67 (06) : 629 - 634
  • [8] GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 2: Clinical practice guidelines
    Alonso-Coello, Pablo
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Moberg, Jenny
    Brignardello-Petersen, Romina
    Akl, Elie A.
    Davoli, Marina
    Treweek, Shaun
    Mustafa, Reem A.
    Vandvik, Per O.
    Meerpohl, Joerg
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    Schunemann, Holger J.
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2016, 353
  • [9] GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations
    Andrews, Jeff
    Guyatt, Gordon
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Alderson, Phil
    Dahm, Philipp
    Falck-Ytter, Yngve
    Nasser, Mona
    Meerpohl, Joerg
    Post, Piet N.
    Kunz, Regina
    Brozek, Jan
    Vist, Gunn
    Rind, David
    Akl, Elie A.
    Schuenemann, Holger J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 66 (07) : 719 - 725
  • [10] GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence
    Balshem, Howard
    Helfand, Mark
    Schuenemann, Holger J.
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Kunz, Regina
    Brozek, Jan
    Vist, Gunn E.
    Falck-Ytter, Yngve
    Meerpohl, Joerg
    Norris, Susan
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 64 (04) : 401 - 406