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
OUP accepted manuscript
TL;DR: In this paper , a systematic review aims to assess the availability and quality of economic evaluations of any orthodontic interventions and summarize the conclusions of these studies and highlight the lack of economic evaluation for orthodentic interventions, and limitations of existing economic evaluations.
Journal ArticleDOI
Mp42-19 decision aids for localized prostate cancer treatment choice: systematic review and meta-analysis
Philippe D. Violette,Thomas Agoritsas,Jarno Riikonen,Henrikki Santti,Paul E. Alexander,Arnav Agarwal,Neera Bhatnagar,Philipp Dahm,Victor M. Montori,Gordon H. Guyatt,Kari A.O. Tikkinen +10 more
TL;DR: A systematic review of randomized trials of decision aids for localized prostate cancer suggests the variable impact of existing decision aids on a limited set of decisional processes and outcomes.
Journal ArticleDOI
Interventions for depression and anxiety among people with diabetes mellitus: Review of systematic reviews
TL;DR: A review of systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials summarized the available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of interventions to treat depression and/or anxiety in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes as mentioned in this paper .
Journal ArticleDOI
Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation for Inflammatory Arthritis and Osteoarthritis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials
TL;DR: In this article , a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the benefits and harms associated with biopsychosocial rehabilitation in patients with inflammatory arthritis and osteoarthritis.
Journal ArticleDOI
Local Anaesthetics Combined with Vasoconstrictors in Controlled Hypertensive Patients Undergoing Dental Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Marinković Dušan,Fuentes Valentina,Azócar Daphne,Vargas-Buratovic Juan Pablo,Verdugo María Francisca,Pinedo Francisco +5 more
TL;DR: In this article , the safety of local anaesthetics (LA) combined with vasoconstrictors (VC) for patients with controlled hypertension undergoing dental procedures was assessed. But the use of VC does not imply an increased risk of occurrence of adverse cardiovascular events.
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