GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes

      Abstract

      GRADE requires a clear specification of the relevant setting, population, intervention, and comparator. It also requires specification of all important outcomes—whether evidence from research studies is, or is not, available. For a particular management question, the population, intervention, and outcome should be sufficiently similar across studies that a similar magnitude of effect is plausible. Guideline developers should specify the relative importance of the outcomes before gathering the evidence and again when evidence summaries are complete. In considering the importance of a surrogate outcome, authors should rate the importance of the patient-important outcome for which the surrogate is a substitute and subsequently rate down the quality of evidence for indirectness of outcome.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      References

        • Schunemann H.J.
        • Cook D.
        • Guyatt G.
        Methodology for antithrombotic and thrombolytic therapy guideline development: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines.
        Chest. 2008; 133 (8th edition): 113S-122S
        • CAPRIE Steering Committee
        A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE).
        Lancet. 1997; 348: 1329-1339
        • Letelier L.M.
        • Udol K.
        • Ena J.
        • Weaver B.
        • Guyatt G.H.
        Effectiveness of amiodarone for conversion of atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm: a meta-analysis.
        Arch Intern Med. 2003; 163: 777-785
        • Guyatt G.
        • et al.
        Grade guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence: inconsistency.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; (In press)
        • Eikelboom J.
        • Guyatt G.
        • Hirsh J.
        Guidelines for anticoagulant use in acute coronary syndromes.
        Lancet. 2008; 371: 1559-1561
        • Furukawa T.A.
        • Guyatt G.H.
        • Griffith L.E.
        Can we individualize the “number needed to treat”? An empirical study of summary effect measures in meta-analyses.
        Int J Epidemiol. 2002; 31: 72-76
        • Schmid C.H.
        • Lau J.
        • McIntosh M.W.
        • Cappelleri J.C.
        An empirical study of the effect of the control rate as a predictor of treatment efficacy in meta-analysis of clinical trials.
        Stat Med. 1998; 17: 1923-1942
        • Deeks J.J.
        Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes.
        Stat Med. 2002; 21: 1575-1600
        • Singer D.E.
        • Albers G.W.
        • Dalen J.E.
        • Fang M.C.
        • Go A.S.
        • Halperin J.L.
        • et al.
        Antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.
        Chest. 2008; 133 (8th edition): 546S-592S
        • Bucher H.C.
        • Griffith L.E.
        • Guyatt G.H.
        Effect of HMGcoA reductase inhibitors on stroke. A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.
        Ann Intern Med. 1998; 128: 89-95
        • Bischoff-Ferrari H.A.
        • Willett W.C.
        • Wong J.B.
        • Giovannucci E.
        • Dietrich T.
        • Dawson-Hughes B.
        Fracture prevention with vitamin D supplementation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
        JAMA. 2005; 293: 2257-2264
        • Montori V.M.
        • Gandhi G.Y.
        • Guyatt G.H.
        Patient-important outcomes in diabetes—time for consensus.
        Lancet. 2007; 370: 1104-1106
        • Gandhi G.Y.
        • Murad M.H.
        • Fujiyoshi A.
        • Mullan R.J.
        • Flynn D.N.
        • Elamin M.B.
        • et al.
        Patient-important outcomes in registered diabetes trials.
        JAMA. 2008; 299: 2543-2549
        • Bucher H.
        • et al.
        Surrogate outcomes.
        in: Guyatt G. The users’ guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY2008
        • Lasser K.E.
        • Allen P.D.
        • Woolhandler S.J.
        • Himmelstein D.U.
        • Wolfe S.M.
        • Bor D.H.
        Timing of new black box warnings and withdrawals for prescription medications.
        JAMA. 2002; 287: 2215-2220
        • Bowker S.L.
        • Majumdar S.R.
        • Veugelers P.
        • Johnson J.A.
        Increased cancer-related mortality for patients with type 2 diabetes who use sulfonylurea or insulin.
        Diabetes Care. 2006; 29: 254-258