Study Design and Setting
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
- GRADE Working Group.(Available at)www.gradeworkingroup.orgDate accessed: September 24, 2018
- Letters, numbers, symbols and words: how to communicate grades of evidence and recommendations.CMAJ. 2003; 169: 677-680
- Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.BMJ. 2004; 328: 1490https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490
- GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.BMJ. 2008; 336: 924-926
- Interpreting GRADE’s levels of certainty or quality of the evidence: GRADE for statisticians, considering review information size or less emphasis on imprecision?.J Clin Epidemiol. 2016; 75: 6-15
- GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables.J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 383-394
- GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence--study limitations (risk of bias).J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 407-415
- ROBINS-I : a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.Br Med J. 2016; : 4-10
- Evaluation of the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) and the ‘target experiment’ concept in studies of exposures: rationale and preliminary instrument development.Environ Int. 2018; 120: 382-387
- GRADE guidelines: 18. How ROBINS-I and other tools to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies should be used to rate the certainty of a body of evidence.J Clin Epidemiol. 2019; 111: 105-114
- Survey Monkey.2018 (Available at)www.surveymonkey.comDate accessed: December 11, 2018
Conflicts of interest: H.J.S. is one of two co-chairs of the GRADE working group, all other authors are members of the GRADE working group.