GRADE guidelines: 13. Preparing Summary of Findings tables and evidence profiles-continuous outcomes

被引:458
作者
Guyatt, Gordon H. [1 ,2 ]
Thorlund, Kristian [1 ]
Oxman, Andrew D. [3 ]
Walter, Stephen D. [1 ]
Patrick, Donald [4 ]
Furukawa, Toshi A. [5 ]
Johnston, Bradley C. [1 ]
Karanicolas, Paul [6 ]
Akl, Elie A. [7 ]
Vist, Gunn [3 ]
Kunz, Regina [8 ]
Brozek, Jan [1 ]
Kupper, Lawrence L. [9 ]
Martin, Sandra L. [10 ]
Meerpohl, Joerg J. [11 ,12 ]
Alonso-Coello, Pablo [13 ,14 ]
Christensen, Robin [15 ]
Schunemann, Holger J. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[2] McMaster Univ, Dept Med, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[3] Norwegian Knowledge Ctr Hlth Serv, N-0130 Oslo, Norway
[4] Univ Washington, Ctr Disabil Policy & Res, Seattle Qual Life Grp, Dept Hlth Serv, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[5] Kyoto Univ, Grad Sch Med, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Promot & Human Behav,Sakyo Ku, Kyoto 6068501, Japan
[6] Univ Toronto, Dept Surg, Toronto, ON, Canada
[7] SUNY Buffalo, Dept Med, Buffalo, NY 14260 USA
[8] Univ Basel Hosp, Basel Inst Clin Epidemiol, CH-4031 Basel, Switzerland
[9] Univ N Carolina, Dept Biostat, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[10] Univ N Carolina, Dept Maternal & Child Hlth, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[11] Univ Med Ctr Freiburg, Inst Med Biometry & Med Informat, German Cochrane Ctr, D-79110 Freiburg, Germany
[12] Univ Med Ctr Freiburg, Ctr Pediat & Adolescent Med, D-79106 Freiburg, Germany
[13] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Hosp St Pau, Iberoamer Cochrane Ctr, Serv Epidemiol Clin & Salud Publ, Barcelona 08041, Spain
[14] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Hosp St Pau, CIBER Epidemiol & Salud Publ CIBERESP, Barcelona 08041, Spain
[15] Copenhagen Univ Hosp, Parker Inst, Musculoskeletal Stat Unit, Frederiksberg, Denmark
关键词
GRADE; Effect size; Standardized mean difference; Minimal important difference; Meta-analysis; Continuous outcomes; HEALTH-STATUS; EFFECT SIZE; QUALITY; METAANALYSIS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.08.001
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Presenting continuous outcomes in Summary of Findings tables presents particular challenges to interpretation. When each study uses the same outcome measure, and the units of that measure are intuitively interpretable (e.g., duration of hospitalization, duration of symptoms), presenting differences in means is usually desirable. When the natural units of the outcome measure are not easily interpretable, choosing a threshold to create a binary outcome and presenting relative and absolute effects become a more attractive alternative. When studies use different measures of the same construct, calculating summary measures requires converting to the same units of measurement for each study. The longest standing and most widely used approach is to divide the difference in means in each study by its standard deviation and present pooled results in standard deviation units (standardized mean difference). Disadvantages of this approach include vulnerability to varying degrees of heterogeneity in the underlying populations and difficulties in interpretation. Alternatives include presenting results in the units of the most popular or interpretable measure, converting to dichotomous measures and presenting relative and absolute effects, presenting the ratio of the means of intervention and control groups, and presenting the results in minimally important difference units. We outline the merits and limitations of each alternative and provide guidance for meta-analysts and guideline developers. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:173 / 183
页数:11
相关论文
共 35 条
  • [1] Meta-analysis of flavonoids for the treatment of haemorrhoids
    Alonso-Coello, P.
    Zhou, Q.
    Martinez-Zapata, M. J.
    Mills, E.
    Heels-Ansdell, D.
    Johanson, J. F.
    Guyatt, G.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2006, 93 (08) : 909 - 920
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2009, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD000213.pub2
  • [3] [Anonymous], COCHRANE DATABASE SY
  • [4] [Anonymous], COCHRANE DATABASE SY
  • [5] [Anonymous], BMJ
  • [6] 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
  • [7] Beck AT., 1996, PsycTESTS, DOI DOI 10.1037/T00742-000
  • [8] GRADE guidelines: 10. Considering resource use and rating the quality of economic evidence
    Brunetti, Massimo
    Shemilt, Ian
    Pregno, Silvia
    Vale, Luke
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Lord, Joanne
    Sisk, Jane
    Ruiz, Francis
    Hill, Suzanne
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    Jaeschke, Roman
    Helfand, Mark
    Harbour, Robin
    Davoli, Marina
    Amato, Laura
    Liberati, Alessandro
    Schuenemann, Holger J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 66 (02) : 140 - 150
  • [9] Cohen J., 1988, Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, VSecond
  • [10] Cox DR., 1989, Analysis of Binary Data, V2nd ed.