GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes

Gordon H. Guyatt, Andrew D. Oxman, Regina Kunz, David Atkins, Jan Brozek, Gunn Vist, Philip Alderson, Paul Glasziou, Yngve Falck-Ytter, Holger J. Schünemann

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleResearchpeer-review

804 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

GRADE requires a clear specification of the relevant setting, population, intervention, and comparator. It also requires specification of all important outcomes - whether evidence from research studies is, or is not, available. For a particular management question, the population, intervention, and outcome should be sufficiently similar across studies that a similar magnitude of effect is plausible. Guideline developers should specify the relative importance of the outcomes before gathering the evidence and again when evidence summaries are complete. In considering the importance of a surrogate outcome, authors should rate the importance of the patient-important outcome for which the surrogate is a substitute and subsequently rate down the quality of evidence for indirectness of outcome.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)395-400
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume64
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2011

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Kunz, R., Atkins, D., Brozek, J., Vist, G., Alderson, P., Glasziou, P., Falck-Ytter, Y., & Schünemann, H. J. (2011). GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(4), 395-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.09.012