ArticleEJIFCC2015
Grading Evidence for Laboratory Test Studies Beyond Diagnostic Accuracy: Application to Prognostic Testing.
Article in EJIFCC, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence-based guideline development requires transparent methodology for gathering, synthesizing and grading the quality and strength of evidence behind recommendations. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) project has addressed diagnostic test use in many of their publications. Most of the work has been directed at diagnostic tests and no consensus has been reached for prognostic biomarkers. AIM OF THIS PAPER: The GRADE system for rating the quality of evidence and the strength of a recommendation is described. The application of GRADE to diagnostic testing is discussed and a description of application to prognostic testing is detailed. Some strengths and limitations of the GRADE process in relation to clinical laboratory testing are presented.
conclusionsThe GRADE system is applicable to clinical laboratory testing and if correctly applied should improve the reporting of recommendations for clinical laboratory tests by standardising the style of recommendation and by encouraging transparent reporting of the actual guideline process.
Identifiers
27683492PMC4975301What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.