Hierarchy of evidence and appraisal of limitations (HEAL) grading system

P. Cristian Gugiu

首页> 外文期刊>Evaluation and program planning >Hierarchy of evidence and appraisal of limitations (HEAL) grading system

【24h】

Hierarchy of evidence and appraisal of limitations (HEAL) grading system

机译：证据层次和限制评估（HEAL）分级系统

获取原文

获取原文并翻译 | 示例

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相似文献
相关主题

摘要

Despite more than 30 years of effort that has been dedicated to the improvement of grading systems for evaluating the quality of research study designs considerable shortcomings continue. These shortcomings include the failure to define key terms, provide a comprehensive list of design flaws, demonstrate the reliability of such grading systems, properly value non-randomized controlled trials, and develop theoretically-derived systems for penalizing and promoting the evidence generated by a study. Consequently, in light of the importance of grading guidelines in evidence-based medicine, steps must be taken to remedy these deficiencies. This article presents two methods - a grading system and a measure of methodological bias - for evaluating the quality of evidence produced by an efficacy study.

机译：尽管已进行了30多年的努力，致力于改进评分系统以评估研究设计的质量，但仍然存在许多缺陷。这些缺点包括无法定义关键术语，无法提供设计缺陷的全面列表，无法证明此类评分系统的可靠性，正确评估非随机对照试验的价值以及开发理论上衍生的系统来惩罚和推广研究产生的证据。因此，鉴于在循证医学中分级指南的重要性，必须采取措施纠正这些缺陷。本文介绍了两种方法-一种评分系统和一种方法学偏倚的评估方法-评估功效研究产生的证据质量。

著录项

来源
《Evaluation and program planning》 |2015年第2期|149-159|共11页
作者
P. Cristian Gugiu;
展开▼
作者单位

Quantitative Research, Evaluation, and Measurement Department of Educational Studies, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States;

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种 eng
中图分类
关键词

相似文献

外文文献
中文文献
专利

1. Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group [J] . David Atkins, Martin Eccles, Signe Flottorp, BMC Health Services Research . 2004,第1期

机译：证据质量和建议强度的分级系统I：现有方法的严格评估GRADE工作组
2. Hierarchy of evidence referring to the central nervous system in a high-impact radiation oncology journal: a 10-year assessment. Descriptive critical appraisal study [J] . álvaro Nagib Atallah, Fabio Ynoe Moraes, Gustavo Nader Marta, Sao Paulo Medical Journal . 2015,第4期

机译：高影响放射肿瘤学期刊中涉及中枢神经系统的证据层次：十年评估。描述性批判性评估研究
3. Adding a "GRADE" to the quality appraisal of rheumatoid arthritis guidelines identifies limitations beyond AGREE-II [J] . Hazlewood Glen S., Akhavan Pooneh, Schieir Orit, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology . 2014,第11期

机译：在类风湿关节炎指南的质量评估中添加“ GRADE”可识别超出AGREE-II的局限性
4. A Case for Evidence-Aware Distributed Reputation Systems Overcoming the Limitations of Plausibility Considerations [C] . Philipp Obreiter Trust Management . 2004

机译：克服似然性考虑因素的循证分布式信誉系统案例
5. Evaluating teacher effectiveness as evidenced by the Professional Development and Appraisal System and the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills. [D] . Welsh, Kimberly A. 2005

机译：通过专业发展和评估系统以及德克萨斯州的知识和技能评估来评估教师的效能。
6. Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group [O] . David Atkins, Martin Eccles, Signe Flottorp, 2004

机译：证据质量和建议强度的分级系统I：现有方法的严格评估GRADE工作组
7. Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group [O] . David Atkins, null null, Martin Eccles, 2005

机译：证据质量和建议强度的分级系统I：现有方法的严格评估GRADE工作组

Hierarchy of evidence and appraisal of limitations (HEAL) grading system

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅