Diagnostic strategy studies commonly focus on the accuracy of tests in diagnosing, and grading this body of evidence is a challenge in itself because (1) standard tools for grading evidence were designed for questions about treatment rather than diagnostic testing; and (2) the clinical usefulness of a diagnostic strategy depends on multiple links in a chain of evidence connecting the performance of a test to changes in clinical outcomes. The application of the GRADE approach requires a shift in clinicians’ thinking to clearly recognize that, whatever their accuracy, diagnostic tests are valuable only if they result in improved outcomes for patients.
GuyattGMontoriVDevereauxPJSchünemannHBhandariM. 4 Patients at the center: In our practice, and in our use of language. ACP J Club2004; 140: A11–A12.
2.
BossuytPMIrwigLCraigJGlasziouP. Comparative accuracy: 6 assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways. BMJ2006; 332: 1089–1092.
3.
SchünemannHJOxmanADBrozekJ. GRADE: Assessing the quality of evidence for diagnostic recommendations. Evid Based Med2008; 13: 162–163.
4.
TatsioniAZarinDAAronsonN. Challenges in systematic reviews of diagnostic technologies. Ann Intern Med2005; 142: 1048–1055.
5.
TurnerDSchunemannHJGriffithLE. Using the entire cohort in the receiver operating characteristic analysis maximizes precision of the minimal important difference. J Clin Epidemiol2009; 62: 374–379.
6.
GuyattGHOxmanADKunzRVistGEFalck-YtterYSchünemannHJ. What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians?BMJ2008; 336: 995–998.
7.
BalshemHHelfandMSchünemannHJ. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol2011; 64: 401–406.
8.
AtkinsDEcclesMFlottorpS. Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches. The GRADE Working Group. BMC Health Serv Res2004; 4: 38–38.
9.
GuyattGOxmanADSultanS. GRADE guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for a single outcome and for all outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol2013; 66: 151–157.
10.
ChongLNasserMGlasziouP. What should we call weak recommendations?Newsl Int Soc Evid Based Health Care2011; 2: 6–6.
11.
GuyattGHOxmanADVistGE. GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ2008; 336: 924–926.
