Article type
Abstract
Background: Currently, there is a deficiency in a quality grading system suitable for complex public health environments.
Objective: To construct a grading method for evidence quality applicable to the field of public health decision-making.
Methods: Based on Delphi survey method, 24 experts were consulted for two rounds of correspondence to form a consensus on the contents of evidence evaluation items, scoring rules and comprehensive evaluation methods.
Results: With the recovery rate being higher than 80% in the two rounds of correspondence interview, the experts’ opinions were seen basically the same, and their positive coefficient was good. The authority coefficient was higher than 0.85. Kendall coordination coeflicients were 0.227 and 0.494, respectively, showing statistical significance (P < 0.05). Integrating expert opinions, a public health decision-making evidence quality evaluation system (PHE-Grading) with 15 first-level items and 55 second-level items were finally constructed. The evidence strength was finally translated into four levels based on the evaluation results of each part of items (up to 15 points) : high ( > 11), moderate ( ( 8-11 ] ). low ( ( 4-8 ] ) and very low ( ≤ 4).
Conclusions: Based on Delphi survey method, the grading system for evidence quality in public health decision-making is initially established, which has good applicability and feasibility, but its system performance and extensibility need to be further verified.
Objective: To construct a grading method for evidence quality applicable to the field of public health decision-making.
Methods: Based on Delphi survey method, 24 experts were consulted for two rounds of correspondence to form a consensus on the contents of evidence evaluation items, scoring rules and comprehensive evaluation methods.
Results: With the recovery rate being higher than 80% in the two rounds of correspondence interview, the experts’ opinions were seen basically the same, and their positive coefficient was good. The authority coefficient was higher than 0.85. Kendall coordination coeflicients were 0.227 and 0.494, respectively, showing statistical significance (P < 0.05). Integrating expert opinions, a public health decision-making evidence quality evaluation system (PHE-Grading) with 15 first-level items and 55 second-level items were finally constructed. The evidence strength was finally translated into four levels based on the evaluation results of each part of items (up to 15 points) : high ( > 11), moderate ( ( 8-11 ] ). low ( ( 4-8 ] ) and very low ( ≤ 4).
Conclusions: Based on Delphi survey method, the grading system for evidence quality in public health decision-making is initially established, which has good applicability and feasibility, but its system performance and extensibility need to be further verified.