• LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo

BORIS Portal

Bern Open Repository and Information System

  • Publications
  • Projects
  • Funding
  • Research Data
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
  • LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo
Unibern.ch
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence.
 

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

Options
  • Details
BORIS DOI
10.7892/boris.107280
Date of Publication
October 2017
Publication Type
Article
Division/Institute

Institut für Sozial- ...

Contributor
Welch, Vivian A
Akl, Elie A
Pottie, Kevin
Ansari, Mohammed T
Briel, Matthias
Christensen, Robin
Dans, Antonio
Dans, Leonila
Eslava-Schmalbach, Javier
Guyatt, Gordon
Hultcrantz, Monica
Jull, Janet
Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal
Lang, Eddy
Matovinovic, Elizabeth
Meerpohl, Joerg J
Morton, Rachael L
Mosdol, Annhild
Murad, M Hassan
Petkovic, Jennifer
Schünemann, Holger
Sharaf, Ravi
Shea, Bev
Singh, Jasvinder A
Solà, Ivan
Stanev, Roger
Stein, Airton
Thabaneii, Lehana
Tonia, Thomaiorcid-logo
Institut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM)
Tristan, Mario
Vitols, Sigurd
Watine, Joseph
Tugwell, Peter
Subject(s)

600 - Technology::610...

300 - Social sciences...

Series
Journal of clinical epidemiology
ISSN or ISBN (if monograph)
0895-4356
Publisher
Elsevier
Language
English
Publisher DOI
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.015
PubMed ID
28389397
Uncontrolled Keywords

Applicability GRADE G...

Description
OBJECTIVES

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.
Handle
https://boris-portal.unibe.ch/handle/20.500.12422/155752
Show full item
File(s)
FileFile TypeFormatSizeLicensePublisher/Copright statementContent
Welch JClinEpidemiol 2017.pdftextAdobe PDF171.64 KBpublishedOpen
BORIS Portal
Bern Open Repository and Information System
Build: 27ad28 [15.10. 15:21]
Explore
  • Projects
  • Funding
  • Publications
  • Research Data
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
More
  • About BORIS Portal
  • Send Feedback
  • Cookie settings
  • Service Policy
Follow us on
  • Mastodon
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
UniBe logo