GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence
Date Issued
2011-01-01
Author(s)
Guyatt, Gordon H
Oxman, Andrew D
Sultan, Shahnaz
Glasziou, Paul
Akl, Elie A
Alonso-Coello, Pablo
Atkins, David
Brozek, Jan
Montori, Victor
Jaeschke, Roman
Rind, David
Dahm, Philipp
Meerpohl, Joerg
Vist, Gunn
Berliner, Elise
Norris, Susan
Falck-Ytter, Yngve
Murad, M Hassan
Schünemann, Holger J
GRADE, Working Group
DOI
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.06.004
Abstract
The most common reason for rating up the quality of evidence is a large effect. GRADE suggests considering rating up quality of evidence one level when methodologically rigorous observational studies show at least a two-fold reduction or increase in risk, and rating up two levels for at least a five-fold reduction or increase in risk. Systematic review authors and guideline developers may also consider rating up quality of evidence when a dose-response gradient is present, and when all plausible confounders or biases would decrease an apparent treatment effect, or would create a spurious effect when results suggest no effect. Other considerations include the rapidity of the response, the underlying trajectory of the condition, and indirect evidence.