新検索ページはこちら
ログイン
お問い合わせ
Minds Tokyo GRADE Center
（2020年3月12日更新）
Minds Tokyo GRADE CenterやGRADE working group、GRADEアプローチに関連した情報を紹介します。
Minds Tokyo GRADE Center
|
Minds Tokyo GRADE Centerとは、日本においてGRADEアプローチを普及するために設立された組織です。 2019年3月に日本医療機能評価機構に設置されました。 主な活動内容は以下の通りです。
|
Minds Tokyo GRADE Center設立記念関連イベントに関する動画
GRADE working group
| GRADE working groupは、GRADEアプローチを開発・提供している、任意の個人から成る国際的なワーキンググループです。ここではGRADEアプローチに関する様々な情報が集約されています。 |
GRADE Handbook
GRADE Handbookは、GRADEアプローチで実施する過程について紹介しています。
GRADE Series in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology誌上で、GRADEアプローチについて、トピックごとに紹介しています。現在、次のような論文があります。
- GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables
- GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes
- GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence
- GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence-study limitations (risk of bias)
- GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence-publication bias
- GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence-imprecision
- GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence-inconsistency
- GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence-indirectness
- GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence
- GRADE guidelines: 10. Considering resource use and rating the quality of economic evidence
- GRADE guidelines: 11. Making an overall rating of confidence in effect estimates for a single outcome and for all outcomes
- GRADE guidelines: 12. Preparing Summary of Findings tables-binary outcomes
- GRADE guidelines: 13. Preparing Summary of Findings tables and evidence profiles-continuous outcomes
- GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations
- GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation's direction and strength
- GRADE Guidelines: 16. GRADE evidence to decision frameworks for tests in clinical practice and public health
- GRADE guidelines 17: assessing the risk of bias associated with missing participant outcome data in a body of evidence
- GRADE guidelines: 18. How ROBINS-I and other tools to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies should be used to rate the certainty of a body of evidence
- GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences—Risk of bias and indirectness
- GRADE guidelines: 20. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences—inconsistency, imprecision, and other domains
- GRADE guidelines: 21 part 1. Study design, risk of bias and indirectness in rating the certainty across a body of evidence for test accuracy
- GRADE guidelines: 21 part 2. Inconsistency, Imprecision, publication bias and other domains for rating the certainty of evidence for test accuracy and presenting it in evidence profiles and summary of findings tables.
- GRADE guidelines: 22. The GRADE approach for tests and strategies—from test accuracy to patient-important outcomes and recommendations
- GRADE guidelines 26: informative statements to communicate the findings of systematic reviews of interventions.
- GRADE guidelines 27: how to calculate absolute effects for time-to-event outcomes in summary of findings tables and Evidence Profiles.
- GRADE Guidelines 28: Use of GRADE for the assessment of evidence about prognostic factors: rating certainty in identification of groups of patients with different absolute risks
Evidence to Decision (EtD) Frameworks
- GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction
- GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 2: Clinical practice guidelines
