Hierarchy of evidence: a framework for ranking evidence evaluating healthcare interventions

Journal of Clinical Nursing - Tập 12 Số 1 - Trang 77-84 - 2003
David Evans1
1Lecturer, Department of Clinical Nursing, University of Adelaide, South Australia 5005

Tóm tắt

Summary• A number of hierarchies of evidence have been developed to enable different research methods to be ranked according to the validity of their findings. However, most have focused on evaluation of the effectiveness of interventions. When the evaluation of healthcare addresses its appropriateness or feasibility, then existing hierarchies are inadequate.• This paper reports the development of a hierarchy for ranking of evidence evaluating healthcare interventions. The aims of this hierarchy are twofold. Firstly, it is to provide a means by which the evidence from a range of methodologically different types of research can be graded. Secondly, it is to provide a logical framework that can be used during the development of systematic review protocols to help determine the study designs which can contribute valid evidence when the evaluation extends beyond effectiveness.• The proposed hierarchy was developed based on a review of literature, investigation of existing hierarchies and examination of the strengths and limitations of different research methods.• The proposed hierarchy of evidence focuses on three dimensions of the evaluation: effectiveness, appropriateness and feasibility. Research that can contribute valid evidence to each is suggested. To address the varying strengths of different research designs, four levels of evidence are proposed: excellent, good, fair and poor.• The strength of the proposed hierarchy is that it acknowledges the valid contribution of evidence generated by a range of different types of research. However, hierarchies only provide a guide to the strength of the available evidence and other issues such as the quality of research also have an important influence.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Ball C., 1998, Levels of Evidence and Grading Recommendations

10.1177/109019818701400404

10.1097/00001786-199604000-00007

10.1056/NEJM200006223422506

10.1136/bmj.312.7040.1215

10.1136/bmj.299.6694.313

Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination., 1979, The periodic health examination, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 121, 1193

Carruthers S.G., 1993, Report of the Canadian Hypertension Society consensus conference: 1. Introduction, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 149, 289

10.1056/NEJM198312013092204

10.1002/sim.4780080408

10.1056/NEJM200006223422507

Cook D.J., 1992, Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents, Chest, 102, 305s, 10.1378/chest.102.4_Supplement.305S

10.1378/chest.108.4_Supplement.227S

Cook D.J., 1998, Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Health Care Decisions

Dawson‐Saunders B., 1994, Basic and Clinical Biostatistics

Elwood M., 1998, Critical Appraisal of Epidemiological Studies and Clinical Trials

10.1016/0895-4356(89)90142-X

Guyatt G.H., 1995, Users guide to the medical literature: IX. A method for grading healthcare recommendations, JAMA, 274, 1800, 10.1001/jama.1995.03530220066035

10.1001/jama.284.10.1290

10.1016/0002-9343(90)90182-D

10.1136/bmj.319.7205.312

Meltzer S., 1998, 1998 clinical practice guidlines for the management of diabetes in Canada, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 159, S1

10.1136/bmj.320.7228.178

10.1002/sim.4780080409

Muir Gray J.A., 1997, Evidence‐Based Healthcare

10.7326/0003-4819-106-3-485

Mulrow C.D., 1997, Cochrane Collaboration Handbook

NHMRC, 1995, Guidelines for the Development and Implementation of Clinical Guidelines

NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 1996, Undertaking Systematic Reviews of Research on Effectiveness. CRD Guidelines for Those Carrying Out or Commissioning Reviews

10.1046/j.1365-2648.1999.00966.x

10.1378/chest.89.2_Supplement.2S

10.1016/S0146-0005(97)80013-4

10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.01244.x

Van Manen M., 1990, Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy

Wilson M.C., 1995, Users guide to the medical literature. VIII. How to use clinical practice guidelines; B. What are the recommendations and will they help you in caring for your patients, JAMA, 274, 1630, 10.1001/jama.1995.03530200066040

10.1016/0895-4356(90)90073-X

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Journal of Clinical Nursing

Tập 12 Số 1

77-84

Thông tin tác giả