Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Jul;65(7):748-55. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.11.013. Epub 2012 May 5.
To determine the effects of formatting alternatives in Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence profiles on guideline panelists' preferences, comprehension, and accessibility.
We randomized 116 antithrombotic therapy guideline panelists to review one of two table formats with four formatting alternatives. After answering relevant questions, panelists reviewed the other format and reported their preferences for specific formatting alternatives.
Panelists (88 of 116 invited [76%]) preferred presentation of study event rates over no study event rates (median 1 [interquartile range (IQR) 1] on 1-7 scale), absolute risk differences over absolute risks (median 2 [IQR 3]), and additional information in table cells over footnotes (median 1 [IQR 2]). Panelists presented with time frame information in the tables, and not only in footnotes, were more likely to correctly answer questions regarding time frame (58% vs. 11%, P<0.0001), and those presented with risk differences and not absolute risks were more likely to correctly interpret confidence intervals for absolute effects (95% vs. 54%, P<0.0001). Information was considered easy to find, easy to comprehend, and helpful in making recommendations regardless of table format (median 6, IQR 0-1).
Panelists found information in GRADE evidence profiles accessible. Correct comprehension of some key information was improved by providing additional information in table and presenting risk differences.
确定在推荐评估、制定和评估（GRADE）证据概况中使用不同的格式选项对指南制定小组成员的偏好、理解和可及性的影响。
我们随机将 116 名抗血栓治疗指南制定小组成员分为两组，分别查看两种表格格式中的四种格式选项。在回答相关问题后，小组成员会查看另一种格式，并报告他们对特定格式选项的偏好。
有 88 名（116 名受邀者中的 76%）指南制定小组成员（88 名）更喜欢展示研究事件发生率而不是没有研究事件发生率（中位数为 1 [四分位距（IQR）1]，分值范围为 1-7），更喜欢展示绝对风险差异而不是绝对风险（中位数为 2 [IQR 3]），更喜欢在表格单元格中而不是脚注中展示额外信息（中位数为 1 [IQR 2]）。在表格中提供时间框架信息，而不仅在脚注中提供，小组成员更有可能正确回答有关时间框架的问题（58%对 11%，P<0.0001），提供风险差异而不是绝对风险的小组成员更有可能正确解释绝对效果置信区间（95%对 54%，P<0.0001）。无论表格格式如何，小组成员都认为信息易于查找、易于理解且有助于做出推荐（中位数为 6，IQR 0-1）。
指南制定小组成员认为 GRADE 证据概况中的信息易于获取。通过在表格中提供额外信息和展示风险差异，可以提高对某些关键信息的正确理解。
