Rating the strength of scientific evidence: relevance for quality improvement programs.
نویسنده
چکیده
OBJECTIVE To summarize an extensive review of systems for grading the quality of research articles and rating the strength of bodies of evidence, and to highlight for health professionals and decision-makers concerned with quality measurement and improvement the available "best practices" tools by which these steps can be accomplished. DESIGN Drawing on an extensive review of checklists, questionnaires, and other tools in the field of evidence-based practice, this paper discusses clinical, management, and policy rationales for rating strength of evidence in a quality improvement context, and documents best practices methods for these tasks. RESULTS After review of 121 systems for grading the quality of articles, 19 systems, mostly STUDY DESIGN specific, met a priori scientific standards for grading systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and diagnostic tests; eight systems (of 40 reviewed) met similar standards for rating the overall strength of evidence. All can be used as is or adapted for particular types of evidence reports or systematic reviews. CONCLUSIONS Formally grading study quality and rating overall strength of evidence, using sound instruments and procedures, can produce reasonable levels of confidence about the science base for parts of quality improvement programs. With such information, health care professionals and administrators concerned with quality improvement can understand better the level of science (versus only clinical consensus or opinion) that supports practice guidelines, review criteria, and assessments that feed into quality assurance and improvement programs. New systems are appearing and research is needed to confirm the conceptual and practical underpinnings of these grading and rating systems, but the need for those developing systematic reviews, practice guidelines, and quality or audit criteria to understand and undertake these steps is becoming increasingly clear.
منابع مشابه
Laboratory medicine best practices: systematic evidence review and evaluation methods for quality improvement.
OBJECTIVE To develop methods for systematically reviewing evidence for identifying effective laboratory medicine (LM) practices associated with improved healthcare quality outcomes. RELEVANCE Although many evidence-evaluation systems have been developed, none are designed to include and rate healthcare quality improvement studies to identify evidence-based practices that improve patient safet...
متن کاملComparison of residents’ approaches to clinical decisions before and after the implementation of Evidence Based Medicine course
Introduction: It has been found that the decision-making process in medicine is affected, to a large extent, by one’s experience, individual mentality, previous models, and common habitual approaches, in addition to scientific principles. Evidence-based medicine is an approach attempting to reinforce scientific, systematic and critical thinking in physicians and provide the ground for optimal d...
متن کاملThe Effects of Accountability Incentives in Early Childhood Education
In an effort to enhance the quality of early childhood education (ECE) at scale, nearly all U.S. states have recently adopted Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS). These accountability systems give providers and parents information on program quality and create both reputational and financial incentives for program improvement. However, we know little about whether these accountability...
متن کاملExercise as a Treatment to Improve the Quality of Life in Patients with Cancer: A Review of the Literature
Objectives: Improvement in cancer care increases life expectancy of patients with cancer, most of whom have experienced prolonged episodes of fatigue during and after their treatment. This has been found to reduce the quality of life and increase morbidity and mortality of such patients. Therefore, additional interventions are beneficial to improve overall quality of life as well as longevity. ...
متن کاملPReS-FINAL-2171: Consensus: what agent to use when first-line vasodilators fail in Raynaud's phenomenon or digital ulcers secondary to rheumatic diseases in children?
Methods Steps in the process of consensus were: a) Identification of expert panel (EP) members, b) Identification of 2 line vasodilators c) identification of outcome measures to define RP and DU improvement, d) systematic literature review; e) summary report of the latest scientific evidence f) expert consensus meeting; g) rating of the strength of evidence. RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care
دوره 16 1 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2004