期刊文献+

临床实践指南制订方法——GRADEpro GDT在干预性系统评价证据分级中的应用 预览

Methodology for clinical practice guidelines--Application of GRADEpro GDT in Evidence Grading of Systematic Reviews of Interventional trial
在线阅读 下载PDF
分享 导出
摘要 实践指南开发工具(Guideline Development Tool,GDT)是GRADE工作组于2013年推出的一款基于GRADE Profiler(GRADEpro)软件扩展的在线工具。GRADEpro GDT支持为系统评价创建简明的汇总表(证据概要表和结果总结表),促进临床实践指南的制订,并为公共卫生政策和决策提出建议。本文通过实例运用GRADEproGTD工具进行干预性系统评价证据的分级并且简单介绍了在证据分级中遇到的5个降级因素(偏倚风险、不一致性、不精确性、间接性、发表偏倚)。 Guideline Development Tool(GDT)is an online tool based on GRADE Profiler(GRADEpro)software extension launched by the GRADE working group in 2013.GRADEpro GDT supports the creation of concise summaries(evidence profiles and summary of findings tables)for systematic reviews,facilitates the development of clinical practice guidelines,and advises on public health policies and decisions.This paper uses the GRADEpro GTD tool to classify the evidence of systematic review of interventional trials and briefly introduces the five degradation factors(risk of bias,inconsistency,imprecision,indirectness,publication bias)encountered in the evidence classification.
作者 邓通 汪洋 王云云 李炳辉 靳英辉 任学群 王行环 Deng Tong;Wang Yang;Wang Yunyun;Li Binghui;JinYinghui;Ren Xuequn;Wang Xinghuan(Center for Evidence-Based and Translational Medicine,ZhongnanHospital of Wuhan University、Center for Evidence-Based and Translational Medicine,Wuhan University、Department of Evidence-Based Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology,The Second Clinical College,Wuhan University,Wuhan 430071)
出处 《中国循证心血管医学杂志》 2019年第1期1-5,共5页 Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Cardiovascular Medicine
基金 国家卫生计生委委托课题(医管办函[2018]9号) 国家重点研发计划专项基金(2016YFC0106300) 湖北省卫生和计划生育委员会联合基金项目(WJ2018H0009).
关键词 GRADEpro GDT 干预性研究 分级 系统评价 GRADEpro GDT Interventional trial Grading Systematic review
作者简介 共同通讯作者:任学群,E-mail:renxuequn001@163.com;共同通讯作者:王行环,E-mail:wangxinghuan1965@163.com.
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献33

  • 1World report on knowledge for better health:strengthening health systems[R].Geneva:World Health Organization,2004. 被引量:1
  • 2Atkins D,Best D,Briss PA,et al.Grading qual ity of evidence and strength of recommendations[J].BMJ,2004,328(7454):1490-1494. 被引量:1
  • 3GRADEpro.[Computer program].Version 3.2 for Windows.Jan Brozek,Andrew Oxman,Holger Schünemann,2008. 被引量:1
  • 4Guyatt GH,Oxman AD,Vist GE,et al.GRADE:an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations[J].BMJ,2008,336(7650):924-926. 被引量:1
  • 5Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 2004, 328(7454): 1490. 被引量:1
  • 6Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMI, 2008, 336(7650): 924-926. 被引量:1
  • 7Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians? BMI, 2008, 336(7651): 995-998. 被引量:1
  • 8Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. Going from evidence to recommendations. BMI, 2008, 336(7652):1049-1051. 被引量:1
  • 9Schiinemann HI, Oxman AD, Brozek J, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BM], 2008, 336(7653): 1106-1110. 被引量:1
  • 10Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. Incorporating considerations of resources use into grading recommendations. BMI, 2008, 336(7654): 1170-1173. 被引量:1

共引文献30

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部 意见反馈