S. Shao, Liang-Tseng Kuo, Yen-Ta Huang, P. Lai, Ching-Chi Chi
{"title":"使用分级推荐评估、发展和评价(GRADE)来评价系统评价研究结果证据的确定性:一个快速教程","authors":"S. Shao, Liang-Tseng Kuo, Yen-Ta Huang, P. Lai, Ching-Chi Chi","doi":"10.4103/ds.ds-d-22-00154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework offers a structured approach to assess the certainty of evidence (CoE) in systematic reviews (SRs). The CoE for each outcome falls into one of the four categories: very low, low, moderate, or high. The judgment of CoE is based on five downgrading factors (including the risk of bias, indirectness, inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias) and three upgrading factors (including large effect size, dose-response relationship, and opposing plausible residual bias and confounding). To improve the transparency of SRs, authors should indicate how they grade the CoE for each outcome and provide a rationale for downgrading or upgrading the CoE.","PeriodicalId":11107,"journal":{"name":"Dermatologica Sinica","volume":"42 1","pages":"3 - 7"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to rate the certainty of evidence of study outcomes from systematic reviews: A quick tutorial\",\"authors\":\"S. Shao, Liang-Tseng Kuo, Yen-Ta Huang, P. Lai, Ching-Chi Chi\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ds.ds-d-22-00154\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework offers a structured approach to assess the certainty of evidence (CoE) in systematic reviews (SRs). The CoE for each outcome falls into one of the four categories: very low, low, moderate, or high. The judgment of CoE is based on five downgrading factors (including the risk of bias, indirectness, inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias) and three upgrading factors (including large effect size, dose-response relationship, and opposing plausible residual bias and confounding). To improve the transparency of SRs, authors should indicate how they grade the CoE for each outcome and provide a rationale for downgrading or upgrading the CoE.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11107,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dermatologica Sinica\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"3 - 7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dermatologica Sinica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ds.ds-d-22-00154\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dermatologica Sinica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ds.ds-d-22-00154","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to rate the certainty of evidence of study outcomes from systematic reviews: A quick tutorial
The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework offers a structured approach to assess the certainty of evidence (CoE) in systematic reviews (SRs). The CoE for each outcome falls into one of the four categories: very low, low, moderate, or high. The judgment of CoE is based on five downgrading factors (including the risk of bias, indirectness, inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias) and three upgrading factors (including large effect size, dose-response relationship, and opposing plausible residual bias and confounding). To improve the transparency of SRs, authors should indicate how they grade the CoE for each outcome and provide a rationale for downgrading or upgrading the CoE.
期刊介绍:
Dermatologica Sinica aims to publish high quality scientific research in the field of dermatology, with the goal of promoting and disseminating dermatological-related medical science knowledge to improve global health. Articles on clinical, laboratory, educational, and social research in dermatology and other related fields that are of interest to the medical profession are eligible for consideration. Review articles, original articles, brief reports, case reports and correspondence are accepted.