Schünemann Holger
Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2009;103(5):261-8. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2009.05.007.
Decisions are a double-edged sword: they always and inevitably come with positive and negative consequences. Decisions in healthcare--from a systems level to the individual patient--are not different. This approach acknowledges that for all recommendations and decisions all the important consequences need to be considered. Along these lines, one must evaluate the certainty that estimates of effects and decisions are likely to be correct. Thus, as institutions, professional societies, organisations and individuals, we should follow approaches focusing on systematic and integrative assessment of available best evidence. Longstanding and broad experience with the development of recommendations, including systematically developed guidelines, led a group of methodologists, health officers, clinicians and guideline developers to form the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. The GRADE approach differentiates the assessment of the quality of evidence from the strength of a recommendation in healthcare. For a step-by-step evaluation of the quality of evidence, one must consider all patient relevant endpoints. It is common that many relevant and acceptable studies provide evidence for single outcomes. Therefore, integrating summaries and assessments beyond meta-analyses are required. The explicit and transparent description of the single steps in these assessments and the consideration of all currently known criteria for the assessment of the quality of evidence are among the most important advantages and innovations of the GRADE system and are described here briefly. The overall quality of evidence of all outcomes that are critical for decision-making are summarized on the basis of the lowest quality of evidence. If, for example, the evidence for six of seven critical outcomes is of low quality while moderate quality evidence is available for the other critical outcome, the overall quality of evidence is considered low to avoid a false sense of certainty with the assessment of the evidence for a given topic. A recommendation according to GRADE also requires a considerate judgement about the magnitude of the expected balance of benefits and downsides for the important outcomes, the relative values and preferences associated with these outcomes and considerations about the required resources. The international collaboration and acceptance by many organisations is an indicator of GRADE's innovative nature and advances in the assessment of evidence and development of recommendations in the context of healthcare.
它们总是不可避免地伴随着积极和消极的后果。医疗保健领域的决策——从系统层面到个体患者层面——并无不同。这种方法承认,对于所有建议和决策,都需要考虑所有重要的后果。按照这些思路,人们必须评估效应估计和决策可能正确的确定性。因此,作为机构、专业协会、组织和个人,我们应该遵循侧重于对现有最佳证据进行系统和综合评估的方法。在制定建议(包括系统制定的指南)方面有着长期而广泛的经验,一群方法学家、卫生官员、临床医生和指南制定者组成了推荐分级评估、制定与评价(GRADE)工作组。GRADE方法区分了医疗保健中证据质量评估与推荐强度。对于证据质量的逐步评估,必须考虑所有与患者相关的终点。许多相关且可接受的研究为单一结果提供证据是很常见的。因此,需要整合超越荟萃分析的总结和评估。这些评估中单个步骤的明确和透明描述以及对所有当前已知证据质量评估标准的考虑是GRADE系统最重要的优势和创新之一,在此简要描述。对决策至关重要的所有结果的证据总体质量是根据最低质量的证据进行总结的。例如,如果七个关键结果中有六个的证据质量低,而另一个关键结果有中等质量的证据,那么证据的总体质量被认为是低质量,以避免在评估给定主题的证据时产生错误的确信感。根据GRADE做出的推荐还需要对重要结果预期的利弊平衡幅度、与这些结果相关的相对价值和偏好以及对所需资源的考虑进行周全的判断。国际合作以及许多组织的认可表明了GRADE在医疗保健背景下证据评估和推荐制定方面的创新性和进步。