TY - JOUR
T1 - GRADE Guidelines
T2 - 16. GRADE evidence to decision frameworks for tests in clinical practice and public health
AU - Schünemann, Holger J.
AU - Mustafa, Reem A.
AU - Brozek, Jan
AU - Santesso, Nancy
AU - Alonso-Coello, Pablo
AU - Guyatt, Gordon
AU - Scholten, Rob
AU - Langendam, Miranda W
AU - Leeflang, Mariska
AU - Akl, Elie A.
AU - Singh, Jasvinder A.
AU - Meerpohl, Joerg
AU - Hultcrantz, Monica
AU - Bossuyt, Patrick Mm
AU - Oxman, Andrew D.
AU - Schünemann, Holger J.
AU - Mustafa, Reem A.
AU - Brozek, Jan
AU - Santesso, Nancy
AU - Alonso-Coello, Pablo
AU - Scholten, Rob
AU - Langendam, Miranda W
AU - Bossuyt, Patrick Mm
AU - Leeflang, Mariska
AU - Singh, Jasvinder
AU - Meerpohl, Joerg
AU - Hultcrantz, Monica
AU - Guyatt, Gordon
AU - Oxman, Andrew D.
AU - Lange, Stefan
AU - Parmelli, Elena
AU - Moberg, Jenny
AU - Rosenbaum, Sarah
AU - Brignardello-Petersen, Romina
AU - Wiercioch, Wojtek
AU - Davoli, Marina
AU - Nowak, Artur
AU - Dietl, Bart
PY - 2016/8/1
Y1 - 2016/8/1
N2 - Objectives To describe the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) interactive evidence to decision (EtD) frameworks for tests and test strategies for clinical, public health, or coverage decisions. Study Design and Setting As part of the GRADE Working Group's DECIDE project, we conducted workshops, user testing with systematic review authors, guideline developers and other decision makers, and piloted versions of the EtD framework. Results EtD frameworks for tests share the structure, explicitness, and transparency of other EtD frameworks. They require specifying the purpose of the test, linked or related management, and the key outcomes of concern for different test results and subsequent management. The EtD criteria address test accuracy and assessments of the certainty of the additional evidence necessary for decision making. When there is no direct evidence of test effects on patient-important outcomes, formal or informal modeling is needed to estimate effects. We describe the EtD criteria based on examples developed with GRADEpro (www.gradepro.org), GRADE's software that also allows development and dissemination of interactive summary of findings tables. Conclusion EtD frameworks for developing recommendations and making decisions about tests lay out the sequential steps in reviewing and assessing the different types of evidence that need to be linked.
AB - Objectives To describe the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) interactive evidence to decision (EtD) frameworks for tests and test strategies for clinical, public health, or coverage decisions. Study Design and Setting As part of the GRADE Working Group's DECIDE project, we conducted workshops, user testing with systematic review authors, guideline developers and other decision makers, and piloted versions of the EtD framework. Results EtD frameworks for tests share the structure, explicitness, and transparency of other EtD frameworks. They require specifying the purpose of the test, linked or related management, and the key outcomes of concern for different test results and subsequent management. The EtD criteria address test accuracy and assessments of the certainty of the additional evidence necessary for decision making. When there is no direct evidence of test effects on patient-important outcomes, formal or informal modeling is needed to estimate effects. We describe the EtD criteria based on examples developed with GRADEpro (www.gradepro.org), GRADE's software that also allows development and dissemination of interactive summary of findings tables. Conclusion EtD frameworks for developing recommendations and making decisions about tests lay out the sequential steps in reviewing and assessing the different types of evidence that need to be linked.
KW - Decision-making
KW - GRADE
KW - GRADEpro
KW - Guidelines
KW - Recommendations
KW - Summary of findings
KW - Tests
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84991666275&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.032
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.032
M3 - Article
C2 - 26931285
AN - SCOPUS:84991666275
SN - 0895-4356
VL - 76
SP - 89
EP - 98
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
ER -