The use of the level of evidence and grade of recommendations scales in developing clinical guidelines in the Russian Federation

N. Zhuravleva, L. C. Shubina, O. Sukhorukikh
{"title":"The use of the level of evidence and grade of recommendations scales in developing clinical guidelines in the Russian Federation","authors":"N. Zhuravleva, L. C. Shubina, O. Sukhorukikh","doi":"10.17749/2070-4909.2019.12.1.34-41","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim – analyze the existing systems for assessing the levels of evidence (LE-scales) and grades of recommendation (GR-scales) in the development of clinical guidelines in the Russian Federation. Materials and Methods. We analyzed the LE- and GR-scales that had been used in developing clinical guidelines up to 01.09.2017; the materials were stored in the Federal Electronic Medical Library. The study included several stages: analysis of the clinical guidelines for the presence and type of LE- and GR-scales; comparison of the LE- and GR-scales between various clinical guidelines including the internationally accepted ones; assessment of using the international scales or their combinations in the development of clinical guidelines in Russia. Results. More than 150 various LE- and GR-scales used for clinical recommendations were identified; most of them represented modifications of the international assessment systems. The original SIGN technique was found to be most commonly used. Conclusion. Based on the results of the study, we concluded that at present, there is no unified approach to the assessment of the levels of evidence and grades of recommendation in clinical guidelines developed by professional medical associations in the Russian Federation.","PeriodicalId":201824,"journal":{"name":"FARMAKOEKONOMIKA. Modern Pharmacoeconomic and Pharmacoepidemiology","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FARMAKOEKONOMIKA. Modern Pharmacoeconomic and Pharmacoepidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17749/2070-4909.2019.12.1.34-41","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Aim – analyze the existing systems for assessing the levels of evidence (LE-scales) and grades of recommendation (GR-scales) in the development of clinical guidelines in the Russian Federation. Materials and Methods. We analyzed the LE- and GR-scales that had been used in developing clinical guidelines up to 01.09.2017; the materials were stored in the Federal Electronic Medical Library. The study included several stages: analysis of the clinical guidelines for the presence and type of LE- and GR-scales; comparison of the LE- and GR-scales between various clinical guidelines including the internationally accepted ones; assessment of using the international scales or their combinations in the development of clinical guidelines in Russia. Results. More than 150 various LE- and GR-scales used for clinical recommendations were identified; most of them represented modifications of the international assessment systems. The original SIGN technique was found to be most commonly used. Conclusion. Based on the results of the study, we concluded that at present, there is no unified approach to the assessment of the levels of evidence and grades of recommendation in clinical guidelines developed by professional medical associations in the Russian Federation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
俄罗斯联邦在制定临床指南中使用证据水平和建议等级量表
目的:分析俄罗斯联邦临床指南制定过程中评估证据水平(le量表)和推荐等级(gr量表)的现有系统。材料与方法。我们分析了截至2017年9月1日用于制定临床指南的LE-和gr量表;这些材料储存在联邦电子医学图书馆。该研究包括几个阶段:分析LE-和gr量表的存在和类型的临床指南;各种临床指南(包括国际通行的指南)之间LE-和gr量表的比较;评估使用国际量表或其组合在俄罗斯临床指南的发展。结果。确定了150多种用于临床推荐的LE-和gr量表;其中大多数是对国际分摊制度的修改。最初的SIGN技术被发现是最常用的。结论。根据研究结果,我们得出结论,目前尚无统一的方法来评估俄罗斯联邦专业医学协会制定的临床指南中的证据水平和推荐等级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Chemoreactome screening of pharmaceutical effects on SARS-CoV-2 and human virome to help decide on drug-based COVID-19 therapy Impact of disease information (Ebola and COVID-19) on the pharmaceutical sector in Russia and USA Analysis of the availability and affordability of pharmaceuticals for children in need of palliative care Comparative effectiveness of simultaneous and staged operations in patients with atherosclerotic lesions of carotid and coronary arteries Systematic computer analysis of published literature on nutritional support for vaccination
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1