Minireviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Gastroenterol. Jan 28, 2020; 26(4): 393-403
Published online Jan 28, 2020. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v26.i4.393
Table 1 Categorization of evidences and recommendations of the clinical guidelines1
Oxford system level of evidences2
1ASystematic review of randomized clinical trials
1BIndividual RCTs with narrow confidence intervals
1CAll or none studies
2ASystematic reviews of cohort studies
2BIndividual cohort study including low-quality RCTs
2COutcomes research; ecological studies
3ASystematic review of case-control studies
3BIndividual case-control studies
4Case series and poor-quality cohort and case-control studies
5Expert opinion without explicit critical appraisal or descriptive epidemiology
GRADE system3
Quality of evidence criteria
High(1) Further research is unlikely to change confidence in the estimate of the clinical effect.
Moderate(2) Further research may change confidence in the estimate of the clinical effect.
Low(3) Further research is very likely to impact confidence on the estimate of clinical effect.
Strength of recommendation criteria
Strong(1) Factors influencing the strength of the recommendation included the quality of the evidence, presumed patient-important outcomes, and cost.
Weak(2) Variability in preferences and values, or more uncertainty. Recommendation is made with less certainty, higher cost, or resource consumption.
NCCN categories of evidence and consensuses4
Category 1Based upon high-level evidence, there is uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.
Category 2ABased upon lower-level evidence, there is uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.
Category 2BBased upon lower-level evidence, there is uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.
Category 3Based upon any level of evidence, there is major NCCN disagreement that the intervention is appropriate.