Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

GRADE Guidance: Update on Developing Good Practice Statements in Guidelines

  • Omar Dewidar
  • , Elie A. Akl
  • , Gian Paolo Morgano
  • , Elena Parmelli
  • , Zuleika Saz-Parkinson
  • , Miranda W. Langendam
  • , Joerg J. Meerpohl
  • , Melanie Marti
  • , Martin Mayer
  • , Benjamin Djulbegovic
  • , Romina Brignardello-Petersen
  • , Derek K. Chu
  • , M. Hassan Murad
  • , Carlos Canelo-Aybar
  • , Joseph L. Mathew
  • , Pablo Alonso-Coello
  • , Amir Qaseem
  • , Lukas Schwingshackl
  • , Antonio Bognanni
  • , Maria Ximena Rojas-Reyes
  • Rebecca L. Morgan, Miloslav Klugar, David Rigau Comas, Elena Stallings, Alfonso Iorio, Peter Tugwell, Andrea Darzi, Alexis F. Turgeon, Tatyana A. Shamliyan, Zachary Munn, Alexander G. Mathioudakis, Thomas Piggott, Tamara Lotfi, Kevin Pottie, Gordon Guyatt, Holger J. Schünemann
  • University of Toronto
  • American University of Beirut
  • European Commission Joint Research Centre
  • McMaster University
  • Amsterdam UMC
  • University of Freiburg
  • World Health Organization
  • EBSCO Industries, Inc.
  • Medical University of South Carolina
  • Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN
  • Hospital de la Sant Pau
  • Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research
  • Centro de Investigación Biomédicaen Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP)
  • American College of Physicians
  • Humanitas University
  • Case Western Reserve University
  • Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic
  • Palacký University Olomouc
  • Hospital Ramon y Cajal
  • University of Ottawa
  • Centre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université Laval (CRCHUL)
  • Adelaide University
  • University of Manchester
  • Queen's University Kingston
  • Dalhousie University

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Despite published guidance by the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Working Group on the use of good practice statements (GPSs), their appropriate development remains challenging. This article provides updated guidance with nuanced operationalization. The updated guidance was developed on the basis of examples and iterative discussions. The lead authors refined the approach according to the feedback from GRADE Working Group meetings and presented the summary of the results to all attendees of the GRADE Working Group meeting for feedback in September 2023 and for final approval in September 2024. The 5 signaling questions from the original guidance were leveraged, and the authors recommend that guideline developers select relevant Evidence to Decision criteria to assess the potential downstream consequences of implementing the statement. They have updated the definition of a GPS, classifying GPSs into the following 3 categories: those grounded in ethics and human rights; those grounded in essential principles, practices, and protocols; and those grounded in established scientific evidence. Practical examples accompany the steps as they relate to each type of GPS. In addition, the authors introduce a tool to streamline GPS development and enhance the reporting process. This GRADE guidance article provides an update on when and how to develop a GPS. Adherence to the guidance will add to the trustworthiness of guidelines and may facilitate reducing the inappropriate use or overuse of the GPS.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)430-439
Number of pages10
JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
Volume179
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2026

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'GRADE Guidance: Update on Developing Good Practice Statements in Guidelines'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this