From the Trenches: A Cross-Sectional Study Applying the GRADE Tool in Systematic Reviews of Healthcare Interventions

被引:20
|
作者
Hartling, Lisa [1 ,2 ]
Fernandes, Ricardo M. [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Seida, Jennifer [1 ]
Vandermeer, Ben [1 ]
Dryden, Donna M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Alberta, Dept Pediat, Alberta Res Ctr Hlth Evidence, Edmonton, AB, Canada
[2] Univ Alberta, Dept Pediat, Cochrane Child Hlth Field, Edmonton, AB, Canada
[3] Hosp Santa Maria, Gulbenkian Programme Adv Med Educ, Lisbon, Portugal
[4] Hosp Santa Maria, Child & Family Dept, Lisbon, Portugal
[5] Inst Mol Med, Lab Farmacol Clin & Terapeut, Lisbon, Portugal
来源
PLOS ONE | 2012年 / 7卷 / 04期
关键词
QUALITY; STRENGTH;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0034697
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background: GRADE was developed to address shortcomings of tools to rate the quality of a body of evidence. While much has been published about GRADE, there are few empirical and systematic evaluations. Objective: To assess GRADE for systematic reviews (SRs) in terms of inter-rater agreement and identify areas of uncertainty. Design: Cross-sectional, descriptive study. Methods: We applied GRADE to three SRs (n = 48, 66, and 75 studies, respectively) with 29 comparisons and 12 outcomes overall. Two reviewers graded evidence independently for outcomes deemed clinically important a priori. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using kappas for four main domains (risk of bias, consistency, directness, and precision) and overall quality of evidence. Results: For the first review, reliability was: kappa = 0.41 for risk of bias; 0.84 consistency; 0.18 precision; and 0.44 overall quality. Kappa could not be calculated for directness as one rater assessed all items as direct; assessors agreed in 41% of cases. For the second review reliability was: 0.37 consistency and 0.19 precision. Kappa could not be assessed for other items; assessors agreed in 33% of cases for risk of bias; 100% directness; and 58% overall quality. For the third review, reliability was: 0.06 risk of bias; 0.79 consistency; 0.21 precision; and 0.18 overall quality. Assessors agreed in 100% of cases for directness. Precision created the most uncertainty due to difficulties in identifying "optimal'' information size and "clinical decision threshold'', as well as making assessments when there was no meta-analysis. The risk of bias domain created uncertainty, particularly for nonrandomized studies. Conclusions: As researchers with varied levels of training and experience use GRADE, there is risk for variability in interpretation and application. This study shows variable agreement across the GRADE domains, reflecting areas where further guidance is required.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] REPORTING QUALITY OF DRUG SAFETY SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY
    Li, L.
    Xu, C.
    Deng, K.
    Zhou, X.
    Sun, X.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2018, 21 : S85 - S85
  • [22] Methodological quality of systematic reviews on treatments for depression: a cross-sectional study
    Chung, V. C. H.
    Wu, X. Y.
    Feng, Y.
    Ho, R. S. T.
    Wong, S. Y. S.
    Threapleton, D.
    [J]. EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRIC SCIENCES, 2018, 27 (06) : 619 - 627
  • [23] Low methodological quality of systematic reviews on acupuncture: a cross-sectional study
    Leonard Ho
    Fiona Y. T. Ke
    Charlene H. L. Wong
    Irene X. Y. Wu
    Andy K. L. Cheung
    Chen Mao
    Vincent C. H. Chung
    [J]. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 21
  • [24] Trial Registry Use in Surgery Systematic Reviews: A Cross-Sectional Study
    Gray, Harrison M.
    Simpson, Alainna
    Bowers, Aaron
    Johnson, Austin L.
    Vassar, Matt
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2020, 247 : 323 - 331
  • [25] Correction: Spin on adverse effects in abstracts of systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions: a cross-sectional study (part 2)
    Pauline A. J. Steegmans
    Nicola Di Girolamo
    Reint A. Meursinge Reynders
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 13
  • [26] Low methodological quality of systematic reviews on acupuncture: a cross-sectional study
    Ho, Leonard
    Ke, Fiona Y. T.
    Wong, Charlene H. L.
    Wu, Irene X. Y.
    Cheung, Andy K. L.
    Mao, Chen
    Chung, Vincent C. H.
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2021, 21 (01)
  • [27] Spin in the reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation of adverse effects of orthodontic interventions: protocol for a cross-sectional study of systematic reviews
    Pauline A. J. Steegmans
    Nicola Di Girolamo
    Reint A. Meursinge Reynders
    [J]. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 4
  • [28] Spin in the reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation of adverse effects of orthodontic interventions: protocol for a cross-sectional study of systematic reviews
    Steegmans, Pauline A. J.
    Di Girolamo, Nicola
    Reynders, Reint A. Meursinge
    [J]. RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND PEER REVIEW, 2019, 4 (01)
  • [29] Use of GRADE in systematic reviews of health effects on pollutants and extreme temperatures: A cross-sectional survey
    Song, Xuping
    Ma, Yan
    Tang, Jing
    Peng, Jiali
    Hu, Yue
    Han, Yunze
    Fu, Xinyu
    Luo, Xufei
    Li, Xiuxia
    Ge, Long
    Yang, Kehu
    Chen, Yaolong
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2023, 159 : 206 - 213
  • [30] Identifying competing interest disclosures in systematic reviews of surgical interventions and devices: a cross-sectional survey
    Yu, Jiajie
    Su, Guanyue
    Hirst, Allison
    Yang, Zhengyue
    Zhang, You
    Li, Youping
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2020, 20 (01)