The introduction of using new version of guideline development tool (GRADE pro GDT) in the systematic reviews of the intervention studies_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

CHEN Hao ¹ , ZENG Xiantao ² , GU Wanjie ³ , BAI Zhengang ⁴ ,  GU Yihuang ¹

1. The Second Clinical College, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, 210023, P.R.China;
2. Center for Evidence-Based and Translational Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, P.R.China;
3. Anesthesiology Department of Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, the Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, 210001, P.R.China;
4. Public School, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, 210001, P.R.China;

Corresponding author：

GU Yihuang, Email: gyh5196411@163.com

Keywords：

GRADE; Grading of evidence; Evidence-based medicine; Systematic review

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.201804090

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Guideline Development Tool (GRADE pro GDT) is an online tool that addresses the integration of the important data and process of the clinical practice guidelines and diagnostic guidelines. GRADE pro GDT has been updated several times, including the whole style of the web page, details of the information recording, management of the conflict of interests, and the presentation and dissemination of the results. The new version of the tool is much more intellectualized and transparent, which makes the guideline development and rating quality of evidence more standardized and scientific. This paper introduces new aspects of this tool with examples.

Citation： CHEN Hao, ZENG Xiantao, GU Wanjie, BAI Zhengang, GU Yihuang. The introduction of using new version of guideline development tool (GRADE pro GDT) in the systematic reviews of the intervention studies. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2018, 18(10): 1135-1142. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.201804090 Copy

1.	Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 2004, 328(7454): 1490.
2.	曾宪涛, 田国祥, 牛玉明, 等. GRADE profiler 软件使用简介. 中国循证心血管医学杂志, 2011, 12(3): 390-392.
3.	陈昊, 王艳, 胡轩铭, 等. GRADE pro GDT 在干预性系统评价证据质量分级中的应用. 中国循证医学杂志, 2015, 15(5): 600-606.
4.	Chen H, Shen FE, Tan XD, et al. Efficacy and safety of acupuncture for essential hypertension: a meta-analysis. Med Sci Monit, 2018, 24: 2946-2969.
5.	Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 2008, 336(7650): 924-926.
6.	陈耀龙, 杨克虎, 姚亮, 等. GRADE 系统方法学进展. 中国循证儿科杂志, 2013, 8(1): 64-65.
7.	曾宪涛, 冷卫东, 李胜, 等. 如何正确理解及使用 GRADE 系统. 中国循证医学杂志, 2011, 11(9): 985-990.
8.	杨楠, 肖淑君, 周奇, 等. GRADE 在网状 Meta 分析中应用的基本原理和方法介绍. 中国循证医学杂志, 2016, 16(5): 598-603.
9.	陈耀龙, 姚亮, 杜亮, 等. GRADE 在诊断准确性试验系统评价中应用的原理、方法、挑战及发展趋势. 中国循证医学杂志, 2014, 14(11): 1402-1406.
10.	姚亮, 陈耀龙, 杜亮, 等. GRADE 在诊断准确性试验系统评价中应用的实例解析. 中国循证医学杂志, 2014, 14(11): 1407-1412.
11.	诊断性试验和策略的证据质量和推荐强度的分级. 中国循证医学杂志, 2009, 9(5): 503-508.Holger J Schünemann, Andrew D Oxman, Jan Brozek, et al.

1. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 2004, 328(7454): 1490.
2. 曾宪涛, 田国祥, 牛玉明, 等. GRADE profiler 软件使用简介. 中国循证心血管医学杂志, 2011, 12(3): 390-392.
3. 陈昊, 王艳, 胡轩铭, 等. GRADE pro GDT 在干预性系统评价证据质量分级中的应用. 中国循证医学杂志, 2015, 15(5): 600-606.
4. Chen H, Shen FE, Tan XD, et al. Efficacy and safety of acupuncture for essential hypertension: a meta-analysis. Med Sci Monit, 2018, 24: 2946-2969.
5. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 2008, 336(7650): 924-926.
6. 陈耀龙, 杨克虎, 姚亮, 等. GRADE 系统方法学进展. 中国循证儿科杂志, 2013, 8(1): 64-65.
7. 曾宪涛, 冷卫东, 李胜, 等. 如何正确理解及使用 GRADE 系统. 中国循证医学杂志, 2011, 11(9): 985-990.
8. 杨楠, 肖淑君, 周奇, 等. GRADE 在网状 Meta 分析中应用的基本原理和方法介绍. 中国循证医学杂志, 2016, 16(5): 598-603.
9. 陈耀龙, 姚亮, 杜亮, 等. GRADE 在诊断准确性试验系统评价中应用的原理、方法、挑战及发展趋势. 中国循证医学杂志, 2014, 14(11): 1402-1406.
10. 姚亮, 陈耀龙, 杜亮, 等. GRADE 在诊断准确性试验系统评价中应用的实例解析. 中国循证医学杂志, 2014, 14(11): 1407-1412.
11. 诊断性试验和策略的证据质量和推荐强度的分级. 中国循证医学杂志, 2009, 9(5): 503-508.Holger J Schünemann, Andrew D Oxman, Jan Brozek, et al.

Previous Article
The survival analysis applied in calculation of markov model transition probability in pharmaceutical evaluation

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

The introduction of using new version of guideline development tool (GRADE pro GDT) in the systematic reviews of the intervention studies

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Format

Content