Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

GRADE guidelines: 21 part 2. Test accuracy: inconsistency, imprecision, publication bias, and other domains for rating the certainty of evidence and presenting it in evidence profiles and summary of findings tables

  • GRADE Working Group
  • McMaster University
  • University of Kansas
  • Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine
  • Amsterdam University Medical Center
  • Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN
  • Bond University
  • Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen
  • University of Freiburg
  • Cochrane Germany Foundation
  • Karolinska Institutet
  • Norwegian Institute of Public Health
  • American University of Beirut
  • Oregon Health and Science University
  • Utrecht University
  • University of Bern
  • University of Milan
  • University of Basel
  • Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd
  • University of Ottawa
  • Duke University
  • Harris Associates
  • Hospital Ramon y Cajal
  • Universidad Tecnológica Equinoccial
  • McGill University

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

299 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objectives: This article provides updated GRADE guidance about how authors of systematic reviews and health technology assessments and guideline developers can rate the certainty of evidence (also known as quality of the evidence or confidence in the estimates) of a body of evidence addressing test accuracy (TA) on the domains imprecision, inconsistency, publication bias, and other domains. It also provides guidance for how to present synthesized information in evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Study Design and Setting: We present guidance for rating certainty in TA in clinical and public health and review the presentation of results of a body of evidence regarding tests. Results: Supplemented by practical examples, we describe how raters of the evidence can apply the GRADE domains inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias to a body of evidence of TA studies. Conclusion: Using GRADE in Cochrane and other reviews as well as World Health Organization and other guidelines helped refining the GRADE approach for rating the certainty of a body of evidence from TA studies. Although several of the GRADE domains (e.g., imprecision and magnitude of the association) require further methodological research to help operationalize them, judgments need to be made on the basis of what is known so far.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)142-152
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume122
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2020

Keywords

  • Certainty of evidence
  • Diagnosis
  • Diagnostic accuracy
  • GRADE
  • Guidelines
  • HTA
  • Systematic reviews
  • Test accuracy
  • Tests

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'GRADE guidelines: 21 part 2. Test accuracy: inconsistency, imprecision, publication bias, and other domains for rating the certainty of evidence and presenting it in evidence profiles and summary of findings tables'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this