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
Effectiveness of physical rehabilitation interventions in critically ill patients—A protocol for an overview of systematic reviews
Ruvistay Gutiérrez-Arias,Peter Nydahl,D. Pieper,Felipe González-Seguel,Yorschua Jalil,Maria Jose Oliveros,Rodrigo Torres-Castro,Pamela Seron +7 more
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors present an overview of published systematic reviews (SRs) aiming to map the existing evidence and to determine the effectiveness of physical rehabilitation interventions to improve neuromusculoskeletal function and other clinical outcomes in critically ill patients.
Journal ArticleDOI
Herbal Medicines for Rhinosinusitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis
Journal ArticleDOI
GRADE Evidence-to-Decision-Tabellen für die Übernahme, Anpassung und De-novo-Entwicklung von vertrauenswürdigen Empfehlungen: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT
Maria Kallenbach,Susann Conrad,Frauke Hoffmann,Katja Matthias,Gerald Gartlehner,Gero Langer,Jörg J. Meerpohl +6 more
TL;DR: In this article, a model for the evaluation of leitlinienentwicklung is presented, which is based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence-to-Decision-Ansatz.
Journal ArticleDOI
The McKenzie method for (sub)acute non-specific low back pain
TL;DR: In this paper , randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the McKenzie method in people with (sub)acute non-specific low back pain.
Journal ArticleDOI
Glenoid failure after total shoulder arthroplasty with cemented all-polyethylene versus metal-backed implants: a systematic review protocol
Renato Aroca Aroca Zan,Rafael Fuchs Lazarini,Fabio Teruo Matsunaga,Nicola Archetti Netto,João Carlos Belloti,Marcel Jun Sugawara Tamaoki +5 more
TL;DR: In this paper, a systematic review of randomised clinical trials or quasi-randomised trials was performed by applying the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis protocols and comparing polyethylene (keeled and pegged) versus metal-backed implants in adult patients with glenohumeral OA.
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