Moving towards Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines
2
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Institute of Medicine in its report “Clinical Practice Guidelines we can trust” defined standards for clinical practice guidelines. However, many guidelines continue to rely on expert opinion and lack a formal framework for moving from evidence to recommendations. These guidelines may or may not be labeled as “consensus statements” and do not meet contemporary standards for guideline documents we would refer to as “evidence-based”. Therefore, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group developed a novel, rigorous and transparent approach to grading certainty (quality) of evidence. In addition, it created a system for “moving from evidence to decisions”, for example for the development of evidence-based guidelines. In this article, we aim to introduce this approach to appraising the certainty of relevant evidence and estimate the benefits and detriments of health care interventions within the larger context of evidence-based medicine.
Abstract
The Institute of Medicine in its report “Clinical Practice Guidelines we can trust” defined standards for clinical practice guidelines. However, many guidelines continue to rely on expert opinion and lack a formal framework for moving from evidence to recommendations. These guidelines may or may not be labeled as “consensus statements” and do not meet contemporary standards for guideline documents we would refer to as “evidence-based”. Therefore, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group developed a novel, rigorous and transparent approach to grading certainty (quality) of evidence. In addition, it created a system for “moving from evidence to decisions”, for example for the development of evidence-based guidelines. In this article, we aim to introduce this approach to appraising the certainty of relevant evidence and estimate the benefits and detriments of health care interventions within the larger context of evidence-based medicine.
참고문헌 (26)
- "Guidelines for the antibiotic use in urinary tract infections" (2018)[URL]
- Murad MH, "New evidence pyramid", Evid Based Med, 21, pp.125~127 (2016)
- Guyatt GH, "What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians?", BMJ, 336, pp.995~998 (2008)
- Zimerman AL, "Evidence-based medicine: a short history of a modern medical movement", Virtual Mentor, 15, pp.71~76 (2013)
- Guyatt GH, "Evidence-based medicine", ACP J Club, 114, pp.A16~ (1991)
- Sackett DL, "Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. 1996", Clin Orthop Relat Res, 455, pp.3~5 (2007)
- Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group, "Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine", JAMA, 268, pp.2420~2425 (1992)
- Sackett DL, "QEvidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM" (2000), Churchill Livingstone
- Robin Graham, "Clinical practice guidelines we can trust" (2011), National Academies Press
- Siering U, "Appraisal tools for clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review", PLoS One, 8, pp.e82915~ (2013)
- Ioannidis JP, "The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses", Milbank Q, 94, pp.485~514 (2016)
- "Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews" (2018)[URL]
- Shea BJ, "AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both", BMJ, 358, pp.j4008~ (2017)
- Moher D, "Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement", BMJ, 339, pp.b2535~ (2009)
- Whiting P, "ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed", J Clin Epidemiol, 69, pp.225~234 (2016)
- Han JL, "The landscape of systematic reviews in urology (1998 to 2015): an assessment of methodological quality", BJU Int, 119, pp.638~649 (2017)
- Guyatt G, "Users' guides to the medical literature. Essentials of evidence-based clinical practice", pp.16~18 (2015), McGraw-Hill education
- Guyatt GH, "GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations", BMJ, 336, pp.924~926 (2008)
- Alonso-Coello P, "GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: introduction", BMJ, 353, pp.i2016~ (2016)
- Guyatt GH, "GRADE guidelines: a new series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology", J Clin Epidemiol, 64, pp.380~382 (2011)
- Guyatt G, "A guide to GRADE guidelines for the readers of JTH", J Thromb Haemost, 11, pp.1603~1608 (2013)
- Guyatt GH, "GRADE Working Group. Going from evidence to recommendations", BMJ, 336, pp.1049~1051 (2008)
- Schunemann HJ, "GRADE Working Group. GRADE guidelines: 16. GRADE evidence to decision frameworks for tests in clinical practice and public health", J Clin Epidemiol, 76, pp.89~98 (2016)
- McCormack J, "Shared decision is the only outcome that matters when it comes to evaluating evidence-based practice", BMJ Evid Based Med, 23, pp.137~139 (2018)
- Tikkinen KAO, "Prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test: a clinical practice guideline", BMJ, 362, pp.k3581~ (2018)
- Vernooij RWM, "Values and preferences of men for undergoing prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer: a systematic review", BMJ Open, 8, pp.e025470~ (2018)