Publications
24 shownGRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Guidelines are inconsistent in how they rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. This article explores the advantages of the GRADE system, which is incr...
Measuring Health-Related Quality of Life
Clinicians and policymakers are recognizing the importance of measuring health-related quality of life (HRQL) to inform patient management and policy decisions. Self- or intervi...
Going from evidence to recommendations
The GRADE system classifies recommendations made in guidelines as either strong or weak. This article explores the meaning of these descriptions and their implications for patie...
What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians?
Guideline developers use a bewildering variety of systems to rate the quality of the evidence underlying their recommendations. Some are facile, some confused, and others sophis...
Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies
Citation: Schünemann, H. J. et al. (2008). 'Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies', BMJ 336 (7653), 1106-1110. [Availab...
Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive
<h3>Abstract</h3> Flavin containing monooxygenases (FMOs) are promiscuous enzymes known for metabolizing a wide range of exogenous compounds. In <i>C. elegans</i>, <i>fmo-2</i> ...
Incorporating considerations of resources use into grading recommendations
Guideline panellists have differing opinions on whether resource use should influence decisions on individual patients. As medical care costs rise, resource use considerations b...
Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations II: Pilot study of a new system
Abstract Background Systems that are used by different organisations to grade the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations vary. They have different strengths and...
An emerging consensus on grading recommendations?
Clinical practice guidelines have improved in quality over the past 10 years by adhering to a few basic principles, such as conducting thorough systematic reviews of relevant ev...
Beyond Mortality
Mortality in National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute-sponsored clinical trials of treatments for acute lung injury (ALI) has decreased dramatically during the past two decades....
Interobserver Variation in Interpreting Chest Radiographs for the Diagnosis of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
To measure the reliability of chest radiographic diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) we conducted an observer agreement study in which two of eight intensivi...
Users' guides to the medical literature
Medical practice is constantly changing. The rate of change is accelerating, and physicians can be forgiven if they often find it dizzying. How can physicians learn about new in...
Randomized trials stopped early for benefit: a systematic review.
RCTs stopped early for benefit are becoming more common, often fail to adequately report relevant information about the decision to stop early, and show implausibly large treatm...
Probiotics for the prevention of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and children
Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 randomized controlled trials including 4213 patients, moderate quality evidence suggests that probiotics are both safe an...
Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Users of clinical practice guidelines and other recommendations need to know how much confidence they can place in the recommendations. Systematic and explicit methods of making...
Users' Guides to the Medical Literature
THE ULTIMATE PURPOSE of applied health research is to improve health care. Summarizing the literature to adduce recommendations for clinical practice is an important part of the...
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing mortality rates of private for-profit and private not-for-profit hospitals.
Our meta-analysis suggests that private for-profit ownership of hospitals, in comparison with private not-for-profit ownership, results in a higher risk of death for patients.
Frequent Co-Authors
Researcher Info
- h-index
- 24
- Publications
- 24
- Citations
- 58,061
- Institution
- McMaster University
External Links
Identifiers
- ORCID
- 0000-0003-2352-5718
Impact Metrics
h-index: Number of publications with at least h citations each.