Grading recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: Randomised experimental evaluation of four different systems

Archives of Disease in Childhood

Volumn 96, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 723-728

  Cuello García, Carlos A ^a   Pacheco Alvarado, Karla P ^a   Pérez Gaxiola, Giordano ^b  

^a ESCUELA DE MEDICINA Y CIENCIAS DE LA SALUD   (Mexico)

^b Hospital Pediátrico de Sinaloa Dr Rigoberto Aguilar Pico   (Mexico)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; DIARRHEA; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIKERT SCALE; MALE; MEXICO; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

ADULT; ANTIDIARRHEALS; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CHILD; DECISION MAKING; DIARRHEA; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HUMANS; MALE; MEXICO; MIDDLE AGED; PEDIATRICS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; THIORPHAN;

EID: 79960565972     PISSN: 00039888     EISSN: 14682044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/adc.2010.199307     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Beck C, Cody M, Souder E, et al. Dementia diagnostic guidelines: methodologies, results, and implementation costs. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48:1195-203.
2. Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, et al. Clinical guidelines: potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ 1999;318:527-30. (Pubitemid 29189000)
3. Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Laupacis A, et al. Clinical recommendations using levels of evidence for antithrombotic agents. Chest 1995;108:227-30S.
4. Sackett DL. Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest 1989;95:2S-4S.
5. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. The periodic health examination. Can Med Assoc J 1979; 121 :1193-254.
6. Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 9. Grading evidence and recommendations. Health Res Policy Syst 2006;4:21.
7. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328:1490.
8. West S, King V, Carey TS, et al. Systems to rate the strength of scientific evidence. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) 2002;1-11.
9. Cuello-García CA, Dávalos-Rodríguez ML. Perceptions and attitudes towards different grading systems from clinical guidelines developers. J Eval Clin Pract 2009;15:1074-6.
10. Salazar-Lindo E, Santisteban-Ponce J, Chea-Woo E, et al. Racecadotril in the treatment of acute watery diarrhea in children. N Engl J Med 2000;343:463-7. (Pubitemid 30646485)
11. Cézard JP, Duhamel JF, Meyer M, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of racecadotril in acute diarrhea in children. Gastroenterology 2001;120:799-805. (Pubitemid 32193175)
12. Emparanza Knörr JI, Ozcoidi Erro I, Martínez Andueza MC, et al. [Systematic review of the efficacy of racecadotril in the treatment of acute diarrhoea]. An Pediatr (Barc) 2008;69:432-8.
13. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Diarrhoea and Vomiting Caused by Gastroenteritis in Children Under 5. NICE Guideline, 2009. http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG84 (accessed 26 July 2010).
14. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, et al. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996;312:71-2.
15. Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, et al. Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA 1999;282:1458-65. (Pubitemid 29493800)
16. Albano F, Lo Vecchio A, Guarino A. The applicability and efficacy of guidelines for the management of acute gastroenteritis in outpatient children: a field-randomized trial on primary care pediatricians. J Pediatr 2010;156:226-30.
17. Althabe F, Buekens P, Bergel E, et al. A behavioral intervention to improve obstetrical care. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1929-40. (Pubitemid 351620113)
18. Akl EA, Maroun N, Guyatt G, et al. Symbols were superior to numbers for presenting strength of recommendations to health care consumers: a randomized trial. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:1298-305. (Pubitemid 350061142)
19. Schünemann HJ, Best D, Vist G, et al. Letters, numbers, symbols and words: how to communicate grades of evidence and recommendations. CMAJ 2003;169:677-80. (Pubitemid 37266979)
20. Howick J. Levels of Evidence. Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM). Oxford: University of Oxford, 2010. http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653 (accessed 26 July 2010).