Publication:
GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence.

cris.virtual.author-orcid0000-0001-7896-6188
cris.virtualsource.author-orcid37adcc41-bab0-4cfb-bc5f-05fb501fab99
datacite.rightsopen.access
dc.contributor.authorWelch, Vivian A
dc.contributor.authorAkl, Elie A
dc.contributor.authorPottie, Kevin
dc.contributor.authorAnsari, Mohammed T
dc.contributor.authorBriel, Matthias
dc.contributor.authorChristensen, Robin
dc.contributor.authorDans, Antonio
dc.contributor.authorDans, Leonila
dc.contributor.authorEslava-Schmalbach, Javier
dc.contributor.authorGuyatt, Gordon
dc.contributor.authorHultcrantz, Monica
dc.contributor.authorJull, Janet
dc.contributor.authorKatikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal
dc.contributor.authorLang, Eddy
dc.contributor.authorMatovinovic, Elizabeth
dc.contributor.authorMeerpohl, Joerg J
dc.contributor.authorMorton, Rachael L
dc.contributor.authorMosdol, Annhild
dc.contributor.authorMurad, M Hassan
dc.contributor.authorPetkovic, Jennifer
dc.contributor.authorSchünemann, Holger
dc.contributor.authorSharaf, Ravi
dc.contributor.authorShea, Bev
dc.contributor.authorSingh, Jasvinder A
dc.contributor.authorSolà, Ivan
dc.contributor.authorStanev, Roger
dc.contributor.authorStein, Airton
dc.contributor.authorThabaneii, Lehana
dc.contributor.authorTonia, Thomai
dc.contributor.authorTristan, Mario
dc.contributor.authorVitols, Sigurd
dc.contributor.authorWatine, Joseph
dc.contributor.authorTugwell, Peter
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-25T13:12:00Z
dc.date.available2024-10-25T13:12:00Z
dc.date.issued2017-10
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES The aim of this paper is to describe a conceptual framework for how to consider health equity in the Grading Recommendations Assessment and Development Evidence (GRADE) guideline development process. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Consensus-based guidance developed by the GRADE working group members and other methodologists. RESULTS We developed consensus-based guidance to help address health equity when rating the certainty of synthesized evidence (i.e., quality of evidence). When health inequity is determined to be a concern by stakeholders, we propose five methods for explicitly assessing health equity: (1) include health equity as an outcome; (2) consider patient-important outcomes relevant to health equity; (3) assess differences in the relative effect size of the treatment; (4) assess differences in baseline risk and the differing impacts on absolute effects; and (5) assess indirectness of evidence to disadvantaged populations and/or settings. CONCLUSION The most important priority for research on health inequity and guidelines is to identify and document examples where health equity has been considered explicitly in guidelines. Although there is a weak scientific evidence base for assessing health equity, this should not discourage the explicit consideration of how guidelines and recommendations affect the most vulnerable members of society.
dc.description.numberOfPages8
dc.description.sponsorshipInstitut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM)
dc.identifier.doi10.7892/boris.107280
dc.identifier.pmid28389397
dc.identifier.publisherDOI10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.015
dc.identifier.urihttps://boris-portal.unibe.ch/handle/20.500.12422/155752
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of clinical epidemiology
dc.relation.issn0895-4356
dc.relation.organizationInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine
dc.subjectApplicability GRADE Guidelines Health Indirectness Meta-analysis Subgroup analysis Systematic review equity
dc.subject.ddc600 - Technology::610 - Medicine & health
dc.subject.ddc300 - Social sciences, sociology & anthropology::360 - Social problems & social services
dc.titleGRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence.
dc.typearticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
dspace.file.typetext
oaire.citation.endPage83
oaire.citation.startPage76
oaire.citation.volume90
oairecerif.author.affiliationInstitut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM)
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.contributor.rolecreator
unibe.date.licenseChanged2019-11-12 01:43:52
unibe.description.ispublishedpub
unibe.eprints.legacyId107280
unibe.journal.abbrevTitleJ CLIN EPIDEMIOL
unibe.refereedtrue
unibe.subtype.articlereview

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Name:
Welch JClinEpidemiol 2017.pdf
Size:
171.64 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
File Type:
text
License:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Content:
published

Collections