Journal ArticleDOI
GRADE guidelines: 13. Preparing Summary of Findings tables and evidence profiles—continuous outcomes
Gordon H. Guyatt,Kristian Thorlund,Andrew D Oxman,Stephen D. Walter,Donald L. Patrick,Toshi A. Furukawa,Bradley C. Johnston,Paul J. Karanicolas,Elie A. Akl,Gunn Elisabeth Vist,Regina Kunz,Jan Brozek,Lawrence L. Kupper,Sandra L. Martin,Joerg J Meerpohl,Pablo Alonso-Coello,Robin Christensen,Holger J. Schünemann +17 more
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
Alternatives include presenting results in the units of the most popular or interpretable measure, converting to dichotomous measures and presenting relative and absolute effects, presenting the ratio of the means of intervention and control groups, and presenting the results in minimally important difference units.About:
This article is published in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.The article was published on 2013-02-01. It has received 461 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Units of measurement.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Grading the strength of a body of evidence when assessing health care interventions: an EPC update
Nancy D. Berkman,Kathleen N. Lohr,Mohammed T. Ansari,Ethan M Balk,Robert L. Kane,Marian McDonagh,Sally C. Morton,Meera Viswanathan,Eric B. Bass,Mary Butler,Gerald Gartlehner,Lisa Hartling,Melissa L McPheeters,Laura C Morgan,James Reston,Priyanka Sista,Evelyn P Whitlock,Stephanie Chang +17 more
TL;DR: No single approach for grading SOE suits all reviews, but a more consistent and transparent approach to reporting summary information will make reviews more useful to the broad range of audiences that AHRQ's work aims to reach.
Journal ArticleDOI
Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival: A systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis.
TL;DR: A more realistic sensitivity meta-analysis accounting for loss to follow-up data and the calculation of prediction intervals demonstrated a possible doubling of the risk of implant loss in the older age groups.
Journal ArticleDOI
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Distraction and Hypnosis for Needle-Related Pain and Distress in Children and Adolescents
Kathryn A. Birnie,Melanie Noel,Jennifer A. Parker,Christine T. Chambers,Lindsay S. Uman,Steve Kisely,Patrick J. McGrath +6 more
TL;DR: Findings showed strong support for distraction and hypnosis for reducing pain and distress from needle procedures, and the quality of available evidence was low, however.
Journal ArticleDOI
Assessing and presenting summaries of evidence in Cochrane Reviews
Miranda W. Langendam,Elie A. Akl,Philipp Dahm,Philipp Dahm,Paul Glasziou,Gordon H. Guyatt,Holger J. Schünemann +6 more
TL;DR: The aim of this paper is to present current work and highlight future developments in assessing and presenting summaries of evidence, with special focus on Summary of Findings (SoF) tables and Plain Language Summaries.
Journal ArticleDOI
Vitamin D supplementation for prevention of cancer in adults
Goran Bjelakovic,Lise Lotte Gluud,Dimitrinka Nikolova,Kate Whitfield,Goran Krstic,Jørn Wetterslev,Christian Gluud +6 more
TL;DR: TSA of the 18 vitamin D trials shows that the futility area is reached after the 10th trial, allowing us to conclude that a possible intervention effect, if any, is lower than a 5% relative risk reduction.
References
More filters
Book
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
TL;DR: The concepts of power analysis are discussed in this paper, where Chi-square Tests for Goodness of Fit and Contingency Tables, t-Test for Means, and Sign Test are used.
Journal ArticleDOI
Development of a Rating Scale for Primary Depressive Illness
TL;DR: This is an account of further work on a rating scale for depressive states, including a detailed discussion on the general problems of comparing successive samples from a ‘population’, the meaning of factor scores, and the other results obtained.
Journal ArticleDOI
GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables
Gordon H. Guyatt,Andrew D Oxman,Elie A. Akl,Regina Kunz,Gunn Elisabeth Vist,Jan Brozek,Susan L Norris,Yngve Falck-Ytter,Paul Glasziou,Hans deBeer,Roman Jaeschke,David Rind,Joerg J Meerpohl,Philipp Dahm,Holger J. Schünemann +14 more
TL;DR: The GRADE process begins with asking an explicit question, including specification of all important outcomes, and provides explicit criteria for rating the quality of evidence that include study design, risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness, and magnitude of effect.
Journal ArticleDOI
GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence
Howard Balshem,Mark Helfand,Mark Helfand,Holger J. Schünemann,Andrew D Oxman,Regina Kunz,Jan Brozek,Gunn Elisabeth Vist,Yngve Falck-Ytter,Joerg J Meerpohl,Susan L Norris,Gordon H. Guyatt +11 more
TL;DR: The approach of GRADE to rating quality of evidence specifies four categories-high, moderate, low, and very low-that are applied to a body of evidence, not to individual studies.
Related Papers (5)
GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency
GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias)
GRADE guidelines: 6. Rating the quality of evidence-imprecision
Gordon H. Guyatt,Andrew D Oxman,Regina Kunz,Jan Brozek,Pablo Alonso-Coello,David Rind,Philip J. Devereaux,Victor M. Montori,Bo Freyschuss,Gunn Elisabeth Vist,Roman Jaeschke,John W Williams,Mohammad Hassan Murad,David A. Sinclair,Yngve Falck-Ytter,Joerg J Meerpohl,Craig Whittington,Kristian Thorlund,Jeffrey C Andrews,Holger J. Schünemann +19 more