GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: A systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 353, Issue , 2016, Pages

  Alonso Coello, Pablo ^a,b   Schünemann, Holger J ^b,k   Moberg, Jenny ^c   Brignardello Petersen, Romina ^b,d   Akl, Elie A ^b,e   Davoli, Marina ^f   Treweek, Shaun ^g   Mustafa, Reem A ^b,h   Rada, Gabriel ^i,j   Rosenbaum, Sarah ^c   Morelli, Angela ^c   Guyatt, Gordon H ^b,k   Oxman, Andrew D ^c   Alonso, Pablo ^k   Flottorp, Signes ^k   Gartlehner, Gerald ^k   Glenton, Claire ^k   Meerpohl, Joerg ^k   Parmelli, Elena ^k   Stanev, Roger ^k   Vandvik, Per ^k   Verstijnen, Ilse ^k   Von Elm Bjorn, Erik ^k   more..

^a CIBER EPIDEMIOLOGÍA Y SALUD PÚBLICA CIBERESP   (Spain)

^b MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

^e AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF BEIRUT   (Lebanon)

^f DEPARTMENT OF EPIDEMIOLOGY   (Italy)

^g UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^h UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

ⁱ PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^j Chile   (Chile)

^k NONE

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS;

EID: 84977108887     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i2016     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Guindo LA, Wagner M, Baltussen R, et al. From efficacy to equity: Literature review of decision criteria for resource allocation and healthcare decisionmaking. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2012;10:9. doi:10.1186/1478-7547-10-9.
2. Tromp N, Baltussen R. Mapping of multiple criteria for priority setting of health interventions: an aid for decision makers. BMC Health Serv Res 2012;12:454. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-12-454.
3. Fischer KE. A systematic review of coverage decision-making on health technologies-evidence from the real world. Health Policy 2012;107:218-30. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.07.005.
4. Verkerk K, Van Veenendaal H, Severens JL, Hendriks EJ, Burgers JS. Considered judgement in evidence-based guideline development. Int J Qual Health Care 2006;18:365-9. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzl040.
5. Aaserud M, Trommald M, Oxman AD, Innvaer S. [Evaluation of reimbursement applications for new drugs]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2002;122:2619-23.
6. Harris AH, Hill SR, Chin G, Li JJ, Walkom E. The role of value for money in public insurance coverage decisions for drugs in Australia: a retrospective analysis 1994-2004. Med Decis Making 2008;28:713-22. doi:10.1177/0272989X08315247.
7. Clement FM, Harris A, Li JJ, Yong K, Lee KM, Manns BJ. Using effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: a comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada. JAMA 2009;302:1437-43. doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1409.
8. Chambers JD, Morris S, Neumann PJ, Buxton MJ. Factors predicting Medicare national coverage: an empirical analysis. Med Care 2012;50:249-56. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e318241eb40.
9. Qaseem A, Forland F, Macbeth F, Ollenschläger G, Phillips S, van der Wees P. Board of Trustees of the Guidelines International Network. Guidelines International Network: toward international standards for clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med 2012;156:525-31. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-156-7-201204030-00009.
10. Alonso-Coello P, Irfan A, Sola I, et al. The quality of clinical practice guidelines over the last two decades: a systematic review of guideline appraisal studies. Qual Saf Health Care 2010;19:e58.
11. Kung J, Miller RR, Mackowiak PA. Failure of clinical practice guidelines to meet institute of medicine standards: Two more decades of little, if any, progress. Arch Intern Med 2012;172:1628-33. doi:10.1001/2013. jamainternmed.56.
12. Oxman AD, Glasziou P, Williams JW Jr. What should clinicians do when faced with conflicting recommendations? BMJ 2008;337:a2530. doi:10.1136/bmj.a2530.
13. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. GRADE Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328:1490. doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490.
14. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:924-6. doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD.
15. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:383-94. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026.
16. Treweek S, Oxman AD, Alderson P, et al. DECIDE Consortium. Developing and Evaluating Communication Strategies to Support Informed Decisions and Practice Based on Evidence (DECIDE): protocol and preliminary results. Implement Sci 2013;8:6. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-6.
17. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE Working Group. Going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:1049-51. doi:10.1136/bmj.39493.646875.AE.
18. Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:719-25. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.03.013.
19. Andrews JC, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation's direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:726-35. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.02.003.
20. Vogel JP, Oxman AD, Glenton C, et al. Policymakers' and other stakeholders' perceptions of key considerations for health system decisions and the presentation of evidence to inform those considerations: an international survey. Health Res Policy Syst 2013;11:19. doi:10.1186/1478-4505-11-19.
21. Alonso-Coello P, Oxman AD, Moberg J, Brignardello-Petersen R, Akl E, et al. GRADE Working Group. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: 2. Clinical practice guidelines. BMJ 2016;353:i2089. doi:10.1136/bmj.i2089
22. World Health Organization. The use of bedaquiline in the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: interim policy guidance. 2013. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/84879/1/9789241505482-eng.pdf.
23. Richardson WS, Wilson MC, Nishikawa J, Hayward RS. The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions. ACP J Club 1995;123:A12-3.
24. Choudhry NK, Stelfox HT, Detsky AS. Relationships between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA 2002;287:612-7. doi:10.1001/jama.287.5.612.
25. Guyatt G, Akl EA, Hirsh J, et al. The vexing problem of guidelines and conflict of interest: a potential solution. Ann Intern Med 2010;152:738-41. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-152-11-201006010-00254.
26. Schünemann HJ, Osborne M, Moss J, et al. ATS Ethics and Conflict of Interest Committee and the Documents Development and Implementation Committee. An official American Thoracic Society Policy statement: managing conflict of interest in professional societies. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2009;180:564-80. doi:10.1164/rccm.200901-0126ST.
27. Schünemann HJ, Al-Ansary LA, Forland F, et al. Board of Trustees of the Guidelines International Network. Guidelines International Network: Principles for Disclosure of Interests and Management of Conflicts in Guidelines. Ann Intern Med 2015;163:548-53. doi:10.7326/M14-1885.
28. Boyd EA, Bero LA. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 4. Managing conflicts of interests. Health Res Policy Syst 2006;4:16. doi:10.1186/1478-4505-4-16.
29. Hsu J, Brozek JL, Terracciano L, et al. Application of GRADE: making evidence-based recommendations about diagnostic tests in clinical practice guidelines. Implement Sci 2011;6:62. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-62.
30. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Schünemann HJ. GRADE Working Group. What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians?BMJ 2008;336:995-8. doi:10.1136/bmj.39490.551019.BE.
31. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:401-6. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015.
32. Kristiansen A, Brandt L, Alonso-Coello P, et al. Development of a novel, multilayered presentation format for clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2015;147:754-63. doi:10.1378/chest.14-1366.
33. Hutton J, Trueman P, Henshall C. Coverage with evidence development: an examination of conceptual and policy issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2007;23:425-32. doi:10.1017/S0266462307070651.
34. Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0. Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. http://training.cochrane.org/handbook.
35. Hailey D. Toward transparency in health technology assessment: a checklist for HTA reports. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2003;19:1-7. doi:10.1017/S0266462303000011.
36. EUnetHTA Joint Action 2, Work Package 8. HTA Core Model version 2.0; 2013. Pdf. www.corehta.info/BrowseModel.aspx
37. Thokala P, Duenas A. Multiple criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment. Value Health 2012;15:1172-81. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.06.015.
38. Goetghebeur MM, Wagner M, Khoury H, Levitt RJ, Erickson LJ, Rindress D. Bridging health technology assessment (HTA) and efficient health care decision making with multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA): applying the EVIDEM framework to medicines appraisal. Med Decis Making 2012;32:376-88. doi:10.1177/0272989X11416870.
39. Brunetti M, Shemilt I, Pregno S, et al. GRADE guidelines: 10. Considering resource use and rating the quality of economic evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:140-50. doi:10.1016/j. jclinepi.2012.04.012.