Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable. / Gopalakrishna, G; Mustafa, Reem; Davenport, Clare; Scholten, Rob JPM; Hyde, CJ; Brozek, J; Schunemann, H; Bossuyt, PMM; Leeflang, MMG; Langendam, MW.

In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 67, No. 7, 07.2014, p. 760-768.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Gopalakrishna, G, Mustafa, R, Davenport, C, Scholten, RJPM, Hyde, CJ, Brozek, J, Schunemann, H, Bossuyt, PMM, Leeflang, MMG & Langendam, MW 2014, 'Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable.', Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 67, no. 7, pp. 760-768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.006

APA

Gopalakrishna, G., Mustafa, R., Davenport, C., Scholten, R. JPM., Hyde, CJ., Brozek, J., Schunemann, H., Bossuyt, PMM., Leeflang, MMG., & Langendam, MW. (2014). Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(7), 760-768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.006

Vancouver

Author

Gopalakrishna, G ; Mustafa, Reem ; Davenport, Clare ; Scholten, Rob JPM ; Hyde, CJ ; Brozek, J ; Schunemann, H ; Bossuyt, PMM ; Leeflang, MMG ; Langendam, MW. / Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable. In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2014 ; Vol. 67, No. 7. pp. 760-768.

Bibtex

@article{1384242647c64a33aec6f0044a05949b,
title = "Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable.",
abstract = "ObjectivesThe Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group developed an approach to assess the quality of evidence of diagnostic tests. Its use in Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews is new. We applied this approach to three Cochrane reviews with the aim of better understanding the application of the GRADE criteria to such reviews.Study Design and SettingWe selected reviews to achieve clinical and methodological diversities. At least three assessors independently assessed each review according to the GRADE criteria of risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision, inconsistency, and publication bias. Two teleconferences were held to share experiences.ResultsFor the interpretation of the GRADE criteria, it made a difference whether assessors looked at the evidence from a patient-important outcome perspective or from a test accuracy standpoint. GRADE criteria such as inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias were challenging to apply as was the assessment of comparative test accuracy reviews.ConclusionThe perspective from which evidence is graded can influence judgments about quality. Guidance on application of GRADE to comparative test reviews and on the GRADE criteria of inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias will facilitate the operationalization of GRADE for diagnostics.",
keywords = "GRADE, Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews, Diagnostic test accuracy, Diagnostics, Systematic reviews, Medical tests",
author = "G Gopalakrishna and Reem Mustafa and Clare Davenport and Scholten, {Rob JPM} and CJ Hyde and J Brozek and H Schunemann and PMM Bossuyt and MMG Leeflang and MW Langendam",
year = "2014",
month = jul,
doi = "10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.006",
language = "English",
volume = "67",
pages = "760--768",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Epidemiology",
issn = "0895-4356",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "7",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable.

AU - Gopalakrishna, G

AU - Mustafa, Reem

AU - Davenport, Clare

AU - Scholten, Rob JPM

AU - Hyde, CJ

AU - Brozek, J

AU - Schunemann, H

AU - Bossuyt, PMM

AU - Leeflang, MMG

AU - Langendam, MW

PY - 2014/7

Y1 - 2014/7

N2 - ObjectivesThe Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group developed an approach to assess the quality of evidence of diagnostic tests. Its use in Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews is new. We applied this approach to three Cochrane reviews with the aim of better understanding the application of the GRADE criteria to such reviews.Study Design and SettingWe selected reviews to achieve clinical and methodological diversities. At least three assessors independently assessed each review according to the GRADE criteria of risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision, inconsistency, and publication bias. Two teleconferences were held to share experiences.ResultsFor the interpretation of the GRADE criteria, it made a difference whether assessors looked at the evidence from a patient-important outcome perspective or from a test accuracy standpoint. GRADE criteria such as inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias were challenging to apply as was the assessment of comparative test accuracy reviews.ConclusionThe perspective from which evidence is graded can influence judgments about quality. Guidance on application of GRADE to comparative test reviews and on the GRADE criteria of inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias will facilitate the operationalization of GRADE for diagnostics.

AB - ObjectivesThe Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group developed an approach to assess the quality of evidence of diagnostic tests. Its use in Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews is new. We applied this approach to three Cochrane reviews with the aim of better understanding the application of the GRADE criteria to such reviews.Study Design and SettingWe selected reviews to achieve clinical and methodological diversities. At least three assessors independently assessed each review according to the GRADE criteria of risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision, inconsistency, and publication bias. Two teleconferences were held to share experiences.ResultsFor the interpretation of the GRADE criteria, it made a difference whether assessors looked at the evidence from a patient-important outcome perspective or from a test accuracy standpoint. GRADE criteria such as inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias were challenging to apply as was the assessment of comparative test accuracy reviews.ConclusionThe perspective from which evidence is graded can influence judgments about quality. Guidance on application of GRADE to comparative test reviews and on the GRADE criteria of inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias will facilitate the operationalization of GRADE for diagnostics.

KW - GRADE

KW - Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews

KW - Diagnostic test accuracy

KW - Diagnostics

KW - Systematic reviews

KW - Medical tests

U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.006

DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.006

M3 - Article

VL - 67

SP - 760

EP - 768

JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

SN - 0895-4356

IS - 7

ER -