Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

GRADE-Leitlinien: 3. Bewertung der Qualität der Evidenz (Vertrauen in die Effektschätzer)

Translated title of the contribution: GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence (confidence in the estimates of effect)
  • Joerg J. Meerpohl
  • , Gero Langer
  • , Matthias Perleth
  • , Gerald Gartlehner
  • , Angela Kaminski-Hartenthaler
  • , Holger Schünemann

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

37 Scopus citations

Abstract

This article introduces the GRADE approach to rating the quality of evidence. GRADE specifies four categories (high, moderate, low, and very low) that are applied to a body of evidence, not to individual studies. In the context of a systematic review, quality reflects our confidence that the estimates of the effect are correct. In the context of recommendations, quality reflects our confidence that the effect estimates are adequate to support a particular recommendation. Randomised trials begin as high quality evidence, observational studies as low quality. "Quality" as used in GRADE means more than risk of bias and so may also be compromised by imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness of study results, and publication bias. In addition, several factors can increase our confidence in an estimate of effect. GRADE provides a systematic approach for considering and reporting each of these factors. GRADE separates the process of assessing quality of evidence from the process of making recommendations. Judgments about the strength of a recommendation depend on more than just the quality of evidence.

Translated title of the contributionGRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence (confidence in the estimates of effect)
Original languageGerman
Pages (from-to)449-456
Number of pages8
JournalZeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen
Volume106
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2012

Keywords

  • GRADE
  • body of evidence
  • imprecision
  • inconsistency
  • indirectness
  • publication bias
  • quality of evidence

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence (confidence in the estimates of effect)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this