Article type
Abstract
Background:It’s known that GRADE was required to grade the evidence of Cochrane Reviews in the Cochrane Handbook version 5.0.0. for a better transparency and credibility over their results. Still, there is no study paying attention to the current situation of Cochrane Reviews on GRADE use and reporting.
Objectives:To investigate the current situation of GRADE use and reporting in Cochrane Reviews.
Methods:We sampled 5% reviews from all Cochrane reviews randomly by the SPSS 19.0. Information was captured in pre-designed table about the publishing year, and usage of GRADE and reporting of its results, etc.
Results:306 Cochrane reviews were included, among which 61 (20%) reported grading the evidence using GRADE. The publication year of the included studies was from 2000 to 2014 and the full-text grading evidence with GRADE were published from 2009 to 2014. About 36% of the included reviews were based on GRADE, in which 5 (1.6%) had no report on evidence grading rusult, 1 (0.3%) reported the evidence profiles (EP) and 55 (18%) presented summary of findings (SOF) tables. Factors that influence the grade of evidence were reported through EP or SOF tables in 49(16%) reviews, and the risk of bias (45, 92%) was the top one influencing the grading results, followed by imprecision (35,71%) and indirectness (7,14%).
Conclusions:More and more Cochrane reviews use GRADE to deal with evidences, but the proportion in whole reviews is low, and the grade result is abnormally reported. Thus, we suggest the developers of Cochrane reviews to improve the GRADE use and perfect the grade report. While the most important factor influencing the evidence grade is the risk of bias.
Objectives:To investigate the current situation of GRADE use and reporting in Cochrane Reviews.
Methods:We sampled 5% reviews from all Cochrane reviews randomly by the SPSS 19.0. Information was captured in pre-designed table about the publishing year, and usage of GRADE and reporting of its results, etc.
Results:306 Cochrane reviews were included, among which 61 (20%) reported grading the evidence using GRADE. The publication year of the included studies was from 2000 to 2014 and the full-text grading evidence with GRADE were published from 2009 to 2014. About 36% of the included reviews were based on GRADE, in which 5 (1.6%) had no report on evidence grading rusult, 1 (0.3%) reported the evidence profiles (EP) and 55 (18%) presented summary of findings (SOF) tables. Factors that influence the grade of evidence were reported through EP or SOF tables in 49(16%) reviews, and the risk of bias (45, 92%) was the top one influencing the grading results, followed by imprecision (35,71%) and indirectness (7,14%).
Conclusions:More and more Cochrane reviews use GRADE to deal with evidences, but the proportion in whole reviews is low, and the grade result is abnormally reported. Thus, we suggest the developers of Cochrane reviews to improve the GRADE use and perfect the grade report. While the most important factor influencing the evidence grade is the risk of bias.