Using the GRADE system in diagnostic strategy: The case of antiphospholipid syndrome

Lupus

Volumn 23, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 1292-1294

  De Abreu, M Mendes ^a   Levy, R A ^b   Wahl, D ^c  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SÃO CARLOS   (Brazil)

^b STATE UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF NANCY   (France)

Author keywords

antiphospholipid syndrome; diagnostic strategy; GRADE

Indexed keywords

ANTIPHOSPHOLIPID SYNDROME; CONFERENCE PAPER; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; GRADES OF RECOMMENDATION ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION; HUMAN; NAMED INVENTORIES, QUESTIONNAIRES AND RATING SCALES; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; STANDARD; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE;

ANTIPHOSPHOLIPID SYNDROME; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS;

EID: 84908668480     PISSN: 09612033     EISSN: 14770962     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0961203314543922     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (11)

1. Guyatt G, Montori V, Devereaux PJ, Schünemann H, Bhandari M. 4 Patients at the center: In our practice, and in our use of language. ACP J Club. 2004 ; 140: A11 - A12
2. Bossuyt PM, Irwig L, Craig J, Glasziou P. Comparative accuracy: 6 assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways. BMJ. 2006 ; 332: 1089-1092
3. Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, et al. GRADE: Assessing the quality of evidence for diagnostic recommendations. Evid Based Med. 2008 ; 13: 162-163
4. Tatsioni A, Zarin DA, Aronson N, et al. Challenges in systematic reviews of diagnostic technologies. Ann Intern Med. 2005 ; 142: 1048-1055
5. Turner D, Schunemann HJ, Griffith LE, et al. Using the entire cohort in the receiver operating characteristic analysis maximizes precision of the minimal important difference. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 ; 62: 374-379
6. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Schünemann HJ. What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians?. BMJ. 2008 ; 336: 995-998
7. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 ; 64: 401-406
8. Atkins D, Eccles M, Flottorp S, et al. Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches. The GRADE Working Group. BMC Health Serv Res. 2004 ; 4: 38-38
9. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Sultan S, et al. GRADE guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for a single outcome and for all outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 ; 66: 151-157
10. Chong L, Nasser M, Glasziou P. What should we call weak recommendations?. Newsl Int Soc Evid Based Health Care. 2011 ; 2: 6-6
11. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008 ; 336: 924-926