Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

GRADE equity guidelines 4: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: evidence to decision process

  • Kevin Pottie
  • , Vivian Welch
  • , Rachael Morton
  • , Elie A. Akl
  • , Javier H. Eslava-Schmalbach
  • , Vittal Katikireddi
  • , Jasvinder Singh
  • , Lorenzo Moja
  • , Eddy Lang
  • , Nicola Magrini
  • , Lehana Thabane
  • , Roger Stanev
  • , Elizabeth Matovinovic
  • , Alexandra Snellman
  • , Matthias Briel
  • , Beverly Shea
  • , Peter Tugwell
  • , Holger Schunemann
  • , Gordon Guyatt
  • , Pablo Alonso-Coello
  • Bruyère Research Institute
  • University of Ottawa
  • The University of Sydney
  • American University of Beirut
  • Universidad Nacional de Colombia
  • University of Glasgow
  • University of Alabama
  • World Health Organization
  • University of Calgary
  • McMaster University
  • Chiang Mai University
  • Karolinska Institutet
  • University of Basel
  • McMaster Medical Centre
  • Centro de Investigación Biomédicaen Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

78 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this paper is to provide detailed guidance on how to incorporate health equity within the GRADE (Grading Recommendations Assessment and Development Evidence) evidence to decision process. Study Design and Setting We developed this guidance based on the GRADE evidence to decision framework, iteratively reviewing and modifying draft documents, in person discussion of project group members and input from other GRADE members. Results Considering the impact on health equity may be required, both in general guidelines and guidelines that focus on disadvantaged populations. We suggest two approaches to incorporate equity considerations: (1) assessing the potential impact of interventions on equity and (2) incorporating equity considerations when judging or weighing each of the evidence to decision criteria. We provide guidance and include illustrative examples. Conclusion Guideline panels should consider the impact of recommendations on health equity with attention to remote and underserviced settings and disadvantaged populations. Guideline panels may wish to incorporate equity judgments across the evidence to decision framework. This is the fourth and final paper in a series about considering equity in the GRADE guideline development process. This series is coming from the GRADE equity subgroup.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)84-91
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume90
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2017

Keywords

  • Disadvantaged
  • Evidence to decision process
  • GRADE guidelines
  • Health equity
  • Special populations
  • Underserved

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'GRADE equity guidelines 4: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: evidence to decision process'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this