Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidance 44: strategies to enhance the utilization of randomized and nonrandomized studies in evidence syntheses of healthinterventions

  • Carlos A. Cuello-Garcia
  • , Rebecca L. Morgan
  • , Nancy Santesso
  • , Pablo Alonso-Coello
  • , Romina Brignardello-Petersen
  • , Lukas Schwingshackl
  • , Jan L. Brozek
  • , Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi
  • , Zachary Munn
  • , Hugh Sharma Waddington
  • , Kevin C. Wilson
  • , Joerg Meerpohl
  • , Daniel Morales
  • , Ignacio Neumann
  • , Peter Tugwell
  • , Gordon Guyatt
  • , Holger J. Schünemann
  • McMaster University
  • Case Western Reserve University
  • Research Institute of the Santa Creu i Sant Pau Hospital
  • University of Freiburg
  • University of Glasgow
  • Adelaide University
  • London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • Boston University
  • Cochrane Germany Foundation
  • University of Dundee
  • Universidad San Sebastián
  • University of Ottawa

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background and Objectives Ideally, guideline developers and health technology assessment authors base intervention decisions on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, relying solely on RCTs is uncommon, especially for public health interventions and harms assessment. In these situations, nonrandomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) can provide valuable information. This article presents Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidance for integrating bodies of evidence RCT and NRSI in evidence syntheses of health interventions. Methods Following standard GRADE methods, we developed this guidance through iterative discussions and examples with experts from the GRADE NRSI project group in multiple dedicated meetings. We presented findings of the group discussions for feedback at GRADE Working Group meetings in September 2023 and May 2024. Results The resulting GRADE guidance outlines a structured approach: (1) assessing the certainty of evidence (CoE) after defining the number of decision thresholds and the target of the certainty rating; (2) evaluating congruency of effect estimates between RCTs and NRSIs; (3) identifying which GRADE domains are affected by certainty ratings to inform complementariness between RCTs and NRSIs and the overall CoE; and (4) deciding whether and how to use one or both types of studies. Conclusion This GRADE guidance offers a structured and practical approach for integrating or not integrating RCTs and NRSIs in evidence syntheses. By addressing the interplay between affected GRADE domains and assessing the congruency of effects, it helps GRADE users determine when and how NRSIs can meaningfully complement or replace RCT evidence to inform certainty ratings and decision-making.

Original languageEnglish
Article number112086
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume190
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2026

Keywords

  • Certainty of evidence
  • Evidence synthesis
  • GRADE
  • Nonrandomized studies
  • Randomized controlled trials
  • Risk of bias

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidance 44: strategies to enhance the utilization of randomized and nonrandomized studies in evidence syntheses of healthinterventions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this