Joerg J Meerpohl

Learn More
This article is the first of a series providing guidance for the use of the GRADE system of rating quality of evidence and grading strength of recommendations in systematic reviews, health technology assessments, and clinical practice guidelines addressing alternative management options. The GRADE process begins with asking an explicit question, including(More)
This article introduces the approach of GRADE to rating quality of evidence. GRADE specifies four categories-high, moderate, low, and very low-that are applied to a body of evidence, not to individual studies. In the context of a systematic review, quality reflects our confidence that the estimates of the effect are correct. In the context of(More)
In the GRADE approach, randomized trials start as high-quality evidence and observational studies as low-quality evidence, but both can be rated down if most of the relevant evidence comes from studies that suffer from a high risk of bias. Well-established limitations of randomized trials include failure to conceal allocation, failure to blind, loss to(More)
Diamond-Blackfan anemia (DBA), a congenital bone-marrow-failure syndrome, is characterized by red blood cell aplasia, macrocytic anemia, clinical heterogeneity, and increased risk of malignancy. Although anemia is the most prominent feature of DBA, the disease is also characterized by growth retardation and congenital anomalies that are present in(More)
GRADE suggests that examination of 95% confidence intervals (CIs) provides the optimal primary approach to decisions regarding imprecision. For practice guidelines, rating down the quality of evidence (i.e., confidence in estimates of effect) is required when clinical action would differ if the upper versus the lower boundary of the CI represented the(More)
GRADE requires a clear specification of the relevant setting, population, intervention, and comparator. It also requires specification of all important outcomes - whether evidence from research studies is, or is not, available. For a particular management question, the population, intervention, and outcome should be sufficiently similar across studies so(More)
X-linked inhibitor of apoptosis (XIAP) deficiency caused by mutations in BIRC4 was initially described in patients with X-linked lymphoproliferative syndrome (XLP) who had no mutations in SH2D1A. In the initial reports, EBV-associated hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) was the predominant clinical phenotype. Among 25 symptomatic patients diagnosed(More)
This article describes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to classifying the direction and strength of recommendations. The strength of a recommendation, separated into strong and weak, is defined as the extent to which one can be confident that the desirable effects of an intervention outweigh its(More)
The most common reason for rating up the quality of evidence is a large effect. GRADE suggests considering rating up quality of evidence one level when methodologically rigorous observational studies show at least a two-fold reduction or increase in risk, and rating up two levels for at least a five-fold reduction or increase in risk. Systematic review(More)
In the GRADE approach, the strength of a recommendation reflects the extent to which we can be confident that the composite desirable effects of a management strategy outweigh the composite undesirable effects. This article addresses GRADE's approach to determining the direction and strength of a recommendation. The GRADE describes the balance of desirable(More)