Cargando…
GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to describe a conceptual framework for how to consider health equity in the Grading Recommendations Assessment and Development Evidence (GRADE) guideline development process. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Consensus-based guidance developed by the GRADE working group...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5680526/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28389397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.015 |
_version_ | 1783277779549159424 |
---|---|
author | Welch, Vivian A. Akl, Elie A. Pottie, Kevin Ansari, Mohammed T. Briel, Matthias Christensen, Robin Dans, Antonio Dans, Leonila Eslava-Schmalbach, Javier Guyatt, Gordon Hultcrantz, Monica Jull, Janet Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal Lang, Eddy Matovinovic, Elizabeth Meerpohl, Joerg J. Morton, Rachael L. Mosdol, Annhild Murad, M. Hassan Petkovic, Jennifer Schünemann, Holger Sharaf, Ravi Shea, Bev Singh, Jasvinder A. Solà, Ivan Stanev, Roger Stein, Airton Thabaneii, Lehana Tonia, Thomy Tristan, Mario Vitols, Sigurd Watine, Joseph Tugwell, Peter |
author_facet | Welch, Vivian A. Akl, Elie A. Pottie, Kevin Ansari, Mohammed T. Briel, Matthias Christensen, Robin Dans, Antonio Dans, Leonila Eslava-Schmalbach, Javier Guyatt, Gordon Hultcrantz, Monica Jull, Janet Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal Lang, Eddy Matovinovic, Elizabeth Meerpohl, Joerg J. Morton, Rachael L. Mosdol, Annhild Murad, M. Hassan Petkovic, Jennifer Schünemann, Holger Sharaf, Ravi Shea, Bev Singh, Jasvinder A. Solà, Ivan Stanev, Roger Stein, Airton Thabaneii, Lehana Tonia, Thomy Tristan, Mario Vitols, Sigurd Watine, Joseph Tugwell, Peter |
author_sort | Welch, Vivian A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to describe a conceptual framework for how to consider health equity in the Grading Recommendations Assessment and Development Evidence (GRADE) guideline development process. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Consensus-based guidance developed by the GRADE working group members and other methodologists. RESULTS: We developed consensus-based guidance to help address health equity when rating the certainty of synthesized evidence (i.e., quality of evidence). When health inequity is determined to be a concern by stakeholders, we propose five methods for explicitly assessing health equity: (1) include health equity as an outcome; (2) consider patient-important outcomes relevant to health equity; (3) assess differences in the relative effect size of the treatment; (4) assess differences in baseline risk and the differing impacts on absolute effects; and (5) assess indirectness of evidence to disadvantaged populations and/or settings. CONCLUSION: The most important priority for research on health inequity and guidelines is to identify and document examples where health equity has been considered explicitly in guidelines. Although there is a weak scientific evidence base for assessing health equity, this should not discourage the explicit consideration of how guidelines and recommendations affect the most vulnerable members of society. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5680526 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56805262017-11-20 GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence Welch, Vivian A. Akl, Elie A. Pottie, Kevin Ansari, Mohammed T. Briel, Matthias Christensen, Robin Dans, Antonio Dans, Leonila Eslava-Schmalbach, Javier Guyatt, Gordon Hultcrantz, Monica Jull, Janet Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal Lang, Eddy Matovinovic, Elizabeth Meerpohl, Joerg J. Morton, Rachael L. Mosdol, Annhild Murad, M. Hassan Petkovic, Jennifer Schünemann, Holger Sharaf, Ravi Shea, Bev Singh, Jasvinder A. Solà, Ivan Stanev, Roger Stein, Airton Thabaneii, Lehana Tonia, Thomy Tristan, Mario Vitols, Sigurd Watine, Joseph Tugwell, Peter J Clin Epidemiol Article OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to describe a conceptual framework for how to consider health equity in the Grading Recommendations Assessment and Development Evidence (GRADE) guideline development process. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Consensus-based guidance developed by the GRADE working group members and other methodologists. RESULTS: We developed consensus-based guidance to help address health equity when rating the certainty of synthesized evidence (i.e., quality of evidence). When health inequity is determined to be a concern by stakeholders, we propose five methods for explicitly assessing health equity: (1) include health equity as an outcome; (2) consider patient-important outcomes relevant to health equity; (3) assess differences in the relative effect size of the treatment; (4) assess differences in baseline risk and the differing impacts on absolute effects; and (5) assess indirectness of evidence to disadvantaged populations and/or settings. CONCLUSION: The most important priority for research on health inequity and guidelines is to identify and document examples where health equity has been considered explicitly in guidelines. Although there is a weak scientific evidence base for assessing health equity, this should not discourage the explicit consideration of how guidelines and recommendations affect the most vulnerable members of society. Elsevier 2017-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5680526/ /pubmed/28389397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.015 Text en © 2017 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Welch, Vivian A. Akl, Elie A. Pottie, Kevin Ansari, Mohammed T. Briel, Matthias Christensen, Robin Dans, Antonio Dans, Leonila Eslava-Schmalbach, Javier Guyatt, Gordon Hultcrantz, Monica Jull, Janet Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal Lang, Eddy Matovinovic, Elizabeth Meerpohl, Joerg J. Morton, Rachael L. Mosdol, Annhild Murad, M. Hassan Petkovic, Jennifer Schünemann, Holger Sharaf, Ravi Shea, Bev Singh, Jasvinder A. Solà, Ivan Stanev, Roger Stein, Airton Thabaneii, Lehana Tonia, Thomy Tristan, Mario Vitols, Sigurd Watine, Joseph Tugwell, Peter GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence |
title | GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence |
title_full | GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence |
title_fullStr | GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence |
title_full_unstemmed | GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence |
title_short | GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence |
title_sort | grade equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in grade guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5680526/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28389397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.015 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT welchviviana gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT akleliea gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT pottiekevin gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT ansarimohammedt gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT brielmatthias gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT christensenrobin gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT dansantonio gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT dansleonila gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT eslavaschmalbachjavier gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT guyattgordon gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT hultcrantzmonica gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT julljanet gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT katikireddisrinivasavittal gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT langeddy gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT matovinovicelizabeth gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT meerpohljoergj gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT mortonrachaell gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT mosdolannhild gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT muradmhassan gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT petkovicjennifer gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT schunemannholger gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT sharafravi gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT sheabev gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT singhjasvindera gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT solaivan gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT stanevroger gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT steinairton gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT thabaneiilehana gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT toniathomy gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT tristanmario gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT vitolssigurd gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT watinejoseph gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence AT tugwellpeter gradeequityguidelines3consideringhealthequityingradeguidelinedevelopmentratingthecertaintyofsynthesizedevidence |