Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of assessments of the sensibility of six approaches to rating levels of evidence and strength of recommendation

From: Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group

Criteria1 ACCP ANHMRC2 USTFCPS OCEBM SIGN USPSTF3
  No   Yes No   Yes No   Yes No   Yes No   Yes No   Yes
1. Applicable to different questions:                   
   Effectiveness    12   2 8   1 11    12 1   11   2 9
   Harm   1 11   5 5 1 7 4   1 11 1 3 8 2 2 7
   Diagnosis 7 3 2 4 4 2 9 3     12 5 2 5 2 2 7
   Prognosis 6 3 3 2 5 3 9 2 1    11 4 3 5 3 3 5
2. Can be used by:                   
   Professionals   1 11 1 5 3   7 4 1 6 5   5 7   3 8
   Policy makers 1 5 6 1 5 3 1 2 9 3 7 2 2 6 4 1 4 6
   Patients 4 5 3 5 5   6 3 3 9 3   7 5   4 6 1
3. Clear and simple 1 5 6 2 6 1 2 8 2 2 4 5 1 5 6 1 4 7
4. Information not available   8 4 1 5 3 1 6 5   4 8 1 7 4 1 9 2
5. Subjective decisions 2 10   5 2 2 5 5 2   7 5 5 7   2 9  
6. Inappropriate dimensions 1 3 8   1 6 2 4 6   1 10 1 2 8 1 4 6
7. Missing dimensions 1 6 5 2 2 4 5 4 3 9 3 1 5 4 3 2 5 4
Aggregation of dimensions:                   
   8. Clear and simple 1 5 6 4 1 2 2 2 7 3 4 4   6 6 2 7 2
   9. Appropriate   6 5 3 1 1 3 4 4 2 5 4 1 4 6 1 5 5
10. Sufficient categories 1 4 6 4 2 1   5 7 2 2 7 1 2 9   1 10
11. Likely to discriminate   7 5 2 5 1 1 9 2 2 4 6   5 7   4 7
12. Assessments reproducible 1 8 3 4 4   2 7 2   7 4 1 8 2   10  
  1. 1See Criteria described in Methods.
  2. 2Two people did not assess the ANHMRC because it was more descriptive and others responded not applicable for some questions.
  3. 3One person did not assess the USPST and one person had two responses on questions 3 and 4.