TY - JOUR
T1 - GRADE Guidance
T2 - Using Thresholds for Judgments on Health Benefits and Harms in Decision Making (GRADE Guidance 42)
AU - Wiercioch, Wojtek
AU - Morgano, Gian Paolo
AU - Piggott, Thomas
AU - Nieuwlaat, Robby
AU - Neumann, Ignacio
AU - Sousa-Pinto, Bernardo
AU - Alonso-Coello, Pablo
AU - Akl, Elie A.
AU - Mbuagbaw, Lawrence
AU - Mirzayev, Fuad
AU - Moja, Lorenzo
AU - Mustafa, Reem
AU - Piovani, Daniele
AU - Parmelli, Elena
AU - Saz-Parkinson, Zuleika
AU - Schumacher, Samuel G.
AU - Verstijnen, Ilse
AU - Bonovas, Stefanos
AU - Schünemann, Holger J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 American College of Physicians. All rights reserved.
PY - 2025/11
Y1 - 2025/11
N2 - Users of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) make judgments about the size of intervention effects on desirable and undesirable people-important health outcomes or on benefits and harms. Benchmarking effect sizes by using decision thresholds (DTs) can help to facilitate these judgments and the process. This article provides GRADE guidance for use of DTs for judgments about the magnitude of desirable and undesirable health effects, such as in a health guideline or health technology assessment. Through iterative discussions and refinement in in-person and online meetings of a GRADE project group and through e-mail communication, the authors developed guidance for using DTs in Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks. The authors applied the approach and used these examples from guidelines and the results of a randomized methodological study to develop official GRADE guidance. Several alternatives for determining and using DTs are presented. In the first main approach, outcome-specific DTs for trivial, small, moderate, and large effects are determined through a calculation using empirically derived generic coefficients and the outcome’s utility value and are compared with the effect estimate obtained from an evidence synthesis. In the second main approach, outcome-specific DTs are also determined, but through direct surveying of decision makers to explicitly assign thresholds for the prioritized health outcomes. The article also describes how these approaches can be combined. The suggested approaches provide transparency for judgments in EtD frameworks that are based on findings from evidence syntheses.
AB - Users of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) make judgments about the size of intervention effects on desirable and undesirable people-important health outcomes or on benefits and harms. Benchmarking effect sizes by using decision thresholds (DTs) can help to facilitate these judgments and the process. This article provides GRADE guidance for use of DTs for judgments about the magnitude of desirable and undesirable health effects, such as in a health guideline or health technology assessment. Through iterative discussions and refinement in in-person and online meetings of a GRADE project group and through e-mail communication, the authors developed guidance for using DTs in Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks. The authors applied the approach and used these examples from guidelines and the results of a randomized methodological study to develop official GRADE guidance. Several alternatives for determining and using DTs are presented. In the first main approach, outcome-specific DTs for trivial, small, moderate, and large effects are determined through a calculation using empirically derived generic coefficients and the outcome’s utility value and are compared with the effect estimate obtained from an evidence synthesis. In the second main approach, outcome-specific DTs are also determined, but through direct surveying of decision makers to explicitly assign thresholds for the prioritized health outcomes. The article also describes how these approaches can be combined. The suggested approaches provide transparency for judgments in EtD frameworks that are based on findings from evidence syntheses.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105022250094
U2 - 10.7326/ANNALS-24-02013
DO - 10.7326/ANNALS-24-02013
M3 - Article
C2 - 41052449
AN - SCOPUS:105022250094
SN - 0003-4819
VL - 178
SP - 1644
EP - 1652
JO - Annals of Internal Medicine
JF - Annals of Internal Medicine
IS - 11
ER -