The GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for health system and public health decisions

Health Research Policy and Systems - Tập 16 - Trang 1-15 - 2018
Jenny Moberg1, Andrew D. Oxman1, Sarah Rosenbaum1, Holger J. Schünemann2, Gordon Guyatt3, Signe Flottorp1, Claire Glenton1, Simon Lewin1,4, Angela Morelli1, Gabriel Rada5, Pablo Alonso-Coello6
1Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
2Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
3Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
4Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa
5Evidence-Based Health Care Program, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
6Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, CIBERESP-IIB Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain

Tóm tắt

To describe a framework for people making and using evidence-informed health system and public health recommendations and decisions. We developed the GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for health system and public health decisions as part of the DECIDE project, in which we simultaneously developed frameworks for these and other types of healthcare decisions, including clinical recommendations, coverage decisions and decisions about diagnostic tests. Building on GRADE EtD tables, we used an iterative approach, including brainstorming, consultation of the literature and with stakeholders, and an international survey of policy-makers. We applied the framework to diverse examples, conducted workshops and user testing with health system and public health guideline developers and policy-makers, and observed and tested its use in real-life guideline panels. All the GRADE EtD frameworks share the same basic structure, including sections for formulating the question, making an assessment and drawing conclusions. Criteria listed in the assessment section of the health system and public health framework cover the important factors for making these types of decisions; in addition to the effects and economic impact of an option, the priority of the problem, the impact of the option on equity, and its acceptability and feasibility are important considerations that can inform both whether and how to implement an option. Because health system and public health interventions are often complex, detailed implementation considerations should be made when making a decision. The certainty of the evidence is often low or very low, but decision-makers must still act. Monitoring and evaluation are therefore often important considerations for these types of decisions. We illustrate the different components of the EtD framework for health system and public health decisions by presenting their application in a framework adapted from a real-life guideline. This framework provides a structured and transparent approach to support policy-making informed by the best available research evidence, while making the basis for decisions accessible to those whom they will affect. The health system and public health EtD framework can also be used to facilitate dissemination of recommendations and enable decision-makers to adopt, and adapt, recommendations or decisions.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Ciapponi A, Lewin S, Herrera CA, Opiyo N, Pantoja T, Paulsen E, et al. Delivery arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;9:CD011083. Wiysonge CS, Paulsen E, Lewin S, Ciapponi A, Herrera CA, Opiyo N, et al. Financial arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;9:CD011084. Herrera CA, Lewin S, Paulsen E, Ciapponi A, Opiyo N, Pantoja T, et al. Governance arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;9:CD011085. Pantoja T, Opiyo N, Lewin S, Paulsen E, Ciapponi A, Wiysonge CS, et al. Implementation strategies for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;9:CD011086. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Vist GE, Liberati A, et al. Going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:1049–51. Andrews J, Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Alderson P, Dahm P, Falck-Ytter Y, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:719–25. Andrews J, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendations: determinants of a recommendations direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:726–35. Akl EA, Kennedy C, Konda K, Caceres CF, Horvath T, Ayala G, et al. Using GRADE methodology for the development of public health guidelines for the prevention and treatment of HIV and other STIs among men who have sex with men and transgender people. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:386. Treweek S, Oxman AD, Alderson P, Bossuyt P, Brożek J, Davoli M, et al. Developing and Evaluating Communication Strategies to Support Informed Decisions and Practice Based on Evidence (DECIDE): protocol and preliminary results. Implementation Sci. 2013;8:6. Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ, Moberg J, Brignardello-Petersen R, Akl EA, Davoli M, et al. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction. BMJ. 2016;353:i2016. Alonso-Coello P, Oxman AD, Moberg J, Brignardello-Petersen R, Akl EA, Davoli M, et al. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 2: Clinical practice guidelines. BMJ. 2016;353:i2089. Schünemann HJ, Mustafa R, Brozek J, Santesso N, Alonso-Coello P, Guyatt G, et al. GRADE Guidelines: 16. GRADE evidence to decision frameworks for tests in clinical practice and public health. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;76:89–98. Parmelli E, Amato L, Oxman AD, Alonso-Coello P, Brunetti M, Moberg J, et al. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for coverage decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017;2017(33):2. Rosenbaum SE, Moberg J, Glenton C, Schünemann HJ, Lewin S, Akl E, et al. Developing Evidence to Decision frameworks and an interactive Evidence to Decision tool for making and using decisions and recommendations in health care. Global Challenges. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.201700081. Lavis JN, Permanand G, Oxman AD, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP). 13. Preparing and using policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S13. The SURE Collaboration. SURE Guides for Preparing and Using Evidence Briefs for Policy. Version 3.0 [updated May 2014]. The SURE Collaboration. 2014. http://www.who.int/evidence/sure/en/. Accessed 15 May 2018. Vogel JP, Oxman AD, Glenton C, Rosenbaum S, Lewin S, Gülmezoglu AM, et al. Policymakers’ and other stakeholders’ perceptions of key considerations for health system decisions and the presentation of evidence to inform those considerations: An international survey. Health Res Policy Syst. 2013;11:19. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2016. http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/maternal_perinatal_health/anc-positive-pregnancy-experience/en/. Accessed 15 May 2018. World Health Organization. WHO recommendation on community mobilization through facilitated participatory learning and action cycles with women’s groups for maternal and newborn health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/127939/1/9789241507271_eng.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 15 May 2018. Glenton C, Lewin S, Gülmezoglu AM. Expanding the evidence base for global recommendations on health systems: strengths and challenges of the OptimizeMNH guidance process. Implement Sci. 2016;11:98. World Health Organization. Optimizing health worker roles to improve access to key maternal and newborn health interventions through task shifting. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012. http://www.optimizemnh.org. Accessed 15 May 2018. World Health Organization. Health worker roles in providing safe abortion care and post-abortion contraception. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015. http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/unsafe_abortion/abortion-task-shifting/en/. Accessed 15 May 2018. Guldbrandsson K, Stenström N, Winzer R. The DECIDE evidence to recommendation framework adapted to the public health field in Sweden. Health Promot Int. 2016;31:749–54. Rosenbaum S. Improving the user experience of evidence: a design approach to evidence-informed health care. Oslo: The Oslo School of Architecture and Design; 2011. https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/handle/11250/93062. Accessed 15 May 2018. Choudhry NK, Stelfox HT, Detsky AS. Relationships between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA. 2002;287:612–7. Schunemann HJ, Osborne M, Moss J, Manthous C, Wagner G, Sicilian L, et al. An official American Thoracic Society Policy statement: managing conflict of interest in professional societies. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2009;180:564–80. Boyd EA, Bero LA. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 4. Managing conflicts of interests. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006;4:16. Guyatt G, Akl EA, Hirsh J, Kearon C, Crowther M, Gutterman D, et al. The vexing problem of guidelines and conflict of interest: a potential solution. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:738–41. Schunemann HJ, Al-Ansary LA, Forland F, et al. Guidelines International Network: principles for disclosure of interests and management of conflicts in guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163:548–53. World Health Organization. Maternal Mortality. Fact Sheet No. 348. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs348/en/index.html. Accessed 15 May 2018. Blencowe H, Cousens S, Bianchi Jassir F, Chou D, Mathers C, et al. National, regional, and worldwide estimates of stillbirth rates in 2015, with trends from 2000: a systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2016;4:e98–e108. Fisk NM, McKee M, Atun R. Relative and absolute addressability of global disease burden in maternal and perinatal health by investment in R&D. Tropical Med Int Health. 2011;16:662–8. Downe S, Finlayson K, Tunçalp Ӧ, Metin Gülmezoglu A. What matters to women: a systematic scoping review to identify the processes and outcomes of antenatal care provision that are important to healthy pregnant women. BJOG. 2016;123:529–39. Oxman AD, Fretheim A, Lavis JN, Lewin S. SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP). 12. Finding and using research evidence about resource use and costs. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S12. Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Fretheim A, Lewin S. SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP). 17. Dealing with insufficient research evidence. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S17. Mangham-Jefferies L, Pitt C, Cousens S, Mills A, Schellenberg J. Cost-effectiveness of strategies to improve the utilization and provision of maternal and newborn health care in low-income and lower-middle-income countries: a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:243. Prost A, Colbourn T, Seward N, Azad K, Coomarasamy A, Copas A, et al. Women's groups practising participatory learning and action to improve maternal and newborn health in low-resource settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2013;381:1736–46. Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S, Fretheim A. SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 10: Taking equity into consideration when assessing the findings of a systematic review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):S10. O'Neill J, Tabish H, Welch V, Petticrew M, Pottie K, Clarke M, et al. Applying an equity lens to interventions: using PROGRESS ensures consideration of socially stratifying factors to illuminate inequities in health. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67:56–64. Tripathy P, Nair N, Barnett S, Mahapatra R, Borghi J, Rath S, et al. Effect of a participatory intervention with women’s groups on birth outcomes and maternal depression in Jharkhand and Orissa, India: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375:1182–92. Houweling TA, Tripathy P, Nair N, Rath S, Rath S, Gope R, et al. The equity impact of participatory women's groups to reduce neonatal mortality in India: secondary analysis of a cluster-randomised trial. Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42:520–32. The SURE Collaboration. Engaging and informing stakeholders. In: SURE Guides for Preparing and Using Evidence Briefs for Policy. Version 3.0 [updated May 2014]: The SURE Collaboration; 2014. http://www.who.int/evidence/sure/en/. Accessed 15 May 2018. Colvin CJ, de Heer J, Winterton L, Mellenkamp M, Glenton C, Noyes J, et al. A systematic review of qualitative evidence on barriers and facilitators to the implementation of task-shifting in midwifery services. Midwifery. 2013;29:1211–21. Schad M, John J. Towards a social discount rate for the economic evaluation of health technologies in Germany: an exploratory analysis. Eur J Health Econ. 2012;13:127–44. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009. Saarni SI, Hofmann B, Lampe K, Lühmann D, Mäkelä M, Velasco-Garrido M, et al. Ethical analysis to improve decision-making on health technologies. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86:617–23. Downe S, Finlayson K, Tunçalp Ö, Gülmezoglu AM. Factors that influence the uptake of routine antenatal services by pregnant women: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;10:CD012392. Fretheim A, Munabi-Babigumira S, Oxman AD, Lavis JN, Lewin S. SUPPORT tools for evidence-informed policymaking in health 6: Using research evidence to address how an option will be implemented. Health Res Policy Syst. 2009;7(Suppl 1):6. The SURE Collaboration. Identifying and addressing barriers to implementing the policy options. In: SURE Guides for Preparing and Using Evidence Briefs for Policy. Version 3.0 [updated May 2014]: The SURE Collaboration; 2014. http://www.who.int/evidence/sure/guides/en/. Accessed 14 May 2018. Memon ZA, Khan GN, Soofi SB, Baig IY, Bhutta ZA. Impact of a community-based perinatal and newborn preventive care package on perinatal and neonatal mortality in a remote mountainous district in Northern Pakistan. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15:106. The SURE Collaboration. Clarifying uncertainties and needs for monitoring and evaluation. In: SURE Guides for Preparing and Using Evidence Briefs for Policy. Version 3.0 [updated May 2014]: The SURE Collaboration; 2014. http://www.who.int/evidence/sure/guides/en/. Accessed 15 May 2018. Oxman AD, Bjørndal A, Becerra-Posada F, Gibson M, Block MA, Haines A, et al. A framework for mandatory impact evaluation to ensure well informed public policy decisions. Lancet. 2010;375:427–31. Petkovic J, Welch V, Jacob MH, Yoganathan M, Ayala AP, Cunningham H, et al. The effectiveness of evidence summaries on health policymakers and health system managers use of evidence from systematic reviews: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2016;11:162. iEtD – Interactive Evidence to Decision Frameworks. https://ietd.epistemonikos.org. Accessed 9 May 2018. GRADEpro GDT. https://gradepro.org/. Accessed 9 May 2018.