Clinical practice guidelines: Potential misconceptions of the GRADE approach

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 67, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 7-9

  Watine, Joseph ^a,b   Wils, Julien ^b,c   Augereau, Christine ^b,d  

^a HÔPITAL DU BOCAGE   (France)

^b Working Group on Guidelines of the Société Française de Biologie Clinique Faculté de Pharmacie   (France)

^c ROUEN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

^d HÔPITAL EUROPÉEN GEORGES POMPIDOU   (France)

Author keywords

Emotions; Evidence; Guidelines; Judgments; Opinions; Values

Indexed keywords

RHESUS D ANTIBODY;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL MEDICINE; ERYTHROCYTE; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; PLASMAPHERESIS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

EID: 84888250856     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.09.001     Document Type: Note

References (5)

1. T.L. Beauchamp, and J. Childress Principles of biomedical ethics 6th ed. 2009 Oxford University Press New York/Oxford
2. R.E. Domen The ethics of paid versus volunteer blood donation J Med Ethics 20 1994 269 270
3. G.H. Guyatt, A.D. Oxman, G.E. Vist, R. Kunz, Y. Falck-Ytter, P. Alonso-Coello GRADE Working Group GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations BMJ 336 2008 924 926
4. R.M. Titmuss The gift relationship: from human blood to social policy 1970 Allen and Unwin London, UK
5. S.E. Straus, W.S. Richardson, P. Glasziou, and R.B. Haynes Evidence-based medicine 3rd ed. 2005 Churchill Livingstone Edinburgh