Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24684818›Full record

ArticleAtencion primaria2015

[GRADE: Methodology for formulating and grading recommendations in clinical practice].

Andrea Juliana Sanabria, David Rigau, Rafael Rotaeche, Anna Selva, Mercè Marzo-Castillejo, Pablo Alonso-Coello

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Atencion primaria, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Atencion primaria · 2018
    Guideline
  9. Pooled it
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Influence of Nutrition on Mental Health: Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  19. Future lines of research on phase angle: Strengths and limitations.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2023
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andrea Juliana SanabriaCentro Cochrane Iberoamericano, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica (IIB-Sant Pau), Barcelona, España.
David RigauCentro Cochrane Iberoamericano, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica (IIB-Sant Pau), Barcelona, España.
Rafael RotaecheGrupo Kronikgune sobre gestión del conocimiento, Centro de Salud de Alza, Donostia-San Sebastián, España.
Anna SelvaCentro Cochrane Iberoamericano, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica (IIB-Sant Pau), Barcelona, España.
Mercè Marzo-CastillejoUnitat de Suport a la Recerca de Costa de Ponent-Institut d'Investigació en Atenció Primària (IDIAP) Jordi Gol, Direcció d'Atenció Primària Costa de Ponent, Institut Català de la Salut, Barcelona, España.
Pablo Alonso-CoelloCentro Cochrane Iberoamericano, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica (IIB-Sant Pau), Barcelona, España. Electronic address: palonso@santpau.cat.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) provide recommendations on the benefits and harms of different healthcare interventions. Proper CPG development and implementation can potentially reduce variability in clinical practice while improving its quality and safety. The GRADE system is used to assess the quality of evidence and to grade the strength of recommendations in the context of the development of CPGs, systematic reviews or health technology assessments. The aim of this article is to describe the main characteristics of the GRADE system through relevant examples in the context of primary care.

Indexed as

Clinical MedicineEvidence-Based MedicineHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicAdhesión a las guíasEvidence-based medicineGuías de práctica clínicaGuideline adherenceMedicina basada en la evidenciaPractice guidelines

Identifiers

PMID24684818
PMCPMC6985631

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.