Urogenit Tract Infect.
2020 Apr;15(1):16-25. 10.14777/uti.2020.15.1.16.
Korean Translation of the GRADE Series Published in the BMJ, ‘GRADE: Grading Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations for Diagnostic Tests and Strategies’ (A Secondary Publication)
- Jung JH
1,2 - Kim DK3
- Kang HW4
- Ku JY5
- Jung HJ6
- Kim HW7
- Hwang EC8
- Guideline Development Committee in the Korean Association of Urogenital Tract Infection and Inflammation
- Affiliations
-
- 1Department of Urology, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Korea
- 2Department of nstitute of Evidence-Based Medicine, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Korea
- 3Department of Urology, Soonchunhyang University Seoul Hospital, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- 4Department of Urology, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju, Korea
- 5Department of Urology, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea
- 6Department of Urology, Daegu Catholic University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea
- 7Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Konyang University, Daejeon, Korea
- 8Department of Urology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Hwasun, Korea
- KMID: 2502291
- DOI: http://doi.org/10.14777/uti.2020.15.1.16
Abstract
- This article is the fourth translation of a GRADE series published in the BMJ, which graded the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests or strategies, as a comprehensive and transparent approach for developing recommendations. Randomized trials for diagnostic approaches represent the ideal study design for intervention studies. On the other hand, cross-sectional or cohort studies with a direct comparison of the test results with an appropriate reference standard can provide high-quality evidence. The guideline panel must be reminded that the test accuracy is a surrogate for patient-important outcomes, so such studies often provide a low quality of evidence for recommendations regarding diagnostic tests, even when the studies do not have serious limitations. Diagnostic accuracy studies showing that a diagnostic test or strategy improves important patient outcomes will require the availability of effective treatment, reduction of testrelated adverse effects or anxiety, or improvement of the patients’ well-being from prognostic information. Therefore, it is important to assess the directness of the test results regarding the consequences of diagnostic recommendations that are important to patients.
- Full Text Links
-
- Actions
-
Cited
- CITED
-
- Close
- Share
-
- Similar articles
-
- Korean Translation of the GRADE Series Published in the BMJ, ‘GRADE: Going from Evidence to Recommendations’ (A Secondary Publication)
- Korean Translation of the GRADE Series Published in the BMJ, ‘GRADE: An Emerging Consensus on Rating Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations’ (A Secondary Publication)
- Korean Translation of the GRADE Series Published in the BMJ, ‘GRADE: Incorporating Considerations of Resources Use into Grading Recommendations’ (A Secondary Publication)
- Korean Translation of the GRADE Series Published in the BMJ, ‘GRADE: What Is “Quality of Evidence†and Why Is It Important to Clinicians?’ (A Secondary Publication)
- Korean Translation of the GRADE Series Published in the BMJ, ‘Use of GRADE Grid to Reach Decisions on Clinical Practice Guidelines When Consensus Is Elusive’ (A Secondary Publication)
