Italian guidelines for cervical cancer screening. Multisocietal recommendations on the use of biomarkers in HPV screening with risk-based approach and GRADE methodology

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on screening for pancreatic cancer in individuals with genetic susceptibility: methodology and review of evidence

The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology provides a framework for assessing the certainty of the evidence and making recommendations. The Evidence to Decision Framework (EtD) is a transparent and structured system for formulating health recommendations. Once the problem is identified and the certainty of the evidence is assessed, EtD provides several criteria for formulating a recommendation. These criteria include the trade-off between benefits and harms, patients values and preferences, acceptability, feasibility, resource use, and impact on equity. The resulting recommendations may differ in strength (strong or weak) and direction (for or against). The process is transparent, allowing other users to adjust the framework of recommendations by modifying the criteria to fit the desired context through an adaptation-adoption process. Given the extensive information available on EtD and the GRADE methodology in general, this narrative review seeks to explain the main concepts involved in decision-making in health by using simplified and friendly descriptions, accompanied by practical examples, thus facilitating its understanding by inexperienced readers.

To develop recommendations for the screening, monitoring, and treatment of uveitis in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Pediatric rheumatologists, ophthalmologists with expertise in uveitis, patient representatives, and methodologists generated key clinical questions to be addressed by this guideline. This was followed by a systematic literature review and rating of the available evidence according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. A group consensus process was used to compose the final recommendations and grade their strength as conditional or strong. Due to a lack of literature with good quality of evidence, recommendations were formulated on the basis of available evidence and a consensus expert opinion. Regular ophthalmic screening of children with JIA is recommended because of the risk of uveitis, and the frequency of screening should be based on individual risk factors. Regular ophthalmic monitoring of children with uveitis is recommended, and intervals should be based on ocular examination findings and treatment regimen. Ophthalmic monitoring recommendations were strong primarily because of concerns of vision-threatening complications of uveitis with infrequent monitoring. Topical glucocorticoids should be used as initial treatment to achieve control of inflammation. Methotrexate and the monoclonal antibody tumor necrosis factor inhibitors adalimumab and infliximab are recommended when systemic treatment is needed for the management of uveitis. The timely addition of nonbiologic and biologic drugs is recommended to maintain uveitis control in children who are at continued risk of vision loss. This guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients/parents making decisions on the screening, monitoring, and management of children with JIA and uveitis, using GRADE methodology and informed by a consensus process with input from rheumatology and ophthalmology experts, current literature, and patient/parent preferences and values.

To develop recommendations for the screening, monitoring, and treatment of uveitis in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Pediatric rheumatologists, ophthalmologists with expertise in uveitis, patient representatives, and methodologists generated key clinical questions to be addressed by this guideline. This was followed by a systematic literature review and rating of the available evidence according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. A group consensus process was used to compose the final recommendations and grade their strength as conditional or strong. Due to a lack of literature with good quality of evidence, recommendations were formulated on the basis of available evidence and a consensus expert opinion. Regular ophthalmic screening of children with JIA is recommended because of the risk of uveitis, and the frequency of screening should be based on individual risk factors. Regular ophthalmic monitoring of children with uveitis is recommended, and intervals should be based on ocular examination findings and treatment regimen. Ophthalmic monitoring recommendations were strong primarily because of concerns of vision-threatening complications of uveitis with infrequent monitoring. Topical glucocorticoids should be used as initial treatment to achieve control of inflammation. Methotrexate and the monoclonal antibody tumor necrosis factor inhibitors adalimumab and infliximab are recommended when systemic treatment is needed for the management of uveitis. The timely addition of nonbiologic and biologic drugs is recommended to maintain uveitis control in children who are at continued risk of vision loss. This guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients/parents making decisions on the screening, monitoring, and management of children with JIA and uveitis, using GRADE methodology and informed by a consensus process with input from rheumatology and ophthalmology experts, current literature, and patient/parent preferences and values.

Targeted mass media interventions promoting healthy behaviours to reduce risk of non-communicable diseases in adult, ethnic minorities.

Blunt traumatic aortic injury (BTAI) is the second most common cause of death in trauma patients. Eighty percent of patients with BTAI will die before reaching a trauma center. The issues of how to diagnose, treat, and manage BTAI were first addressed by the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) in the practice management guidelines on this topic published in 2000. Since that time, there have been advances in the management of BTAI. As a result, the EAST guidelines committee decided to develop updated guidelines for this topic using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework recently adopted by EAST. A systematic review of the MEDLINE database using PubMed was performed. The search retrieved English language articles regarding BTAI from 1998 to 2013. Letters to the editor, case reports, book chapters, and review articles were excluded. Topics of investigation included imaging to diagnose BTAI, type of operative repair, and timing of operative repair. Sixty articles were identified. Of these, 51 articles were selected to construct the guidelines. There have been changes in practice since the publication of the previous guidelines in 2000. Computed tomography of the chest with intravenous contrast is strongly recommended to diagnose clinically significant BTAI. Endovascular repair is strongly recommended for patients without contraindications. Delayed repair of BTAI is suggested, with the stipulation that effective blood pressure control must be used in these patients.

AGA Institute Rapid Review and Recommendations on the Role of Pre-Procedure SARS-CoV-2 Testing and Endoscopy

Senior GRADE methodologists encounter challenges as part of WHO guideline development panels: an inductive content analysis

Introduction: SENTIERI Project (Epidemiological Study of Residents in Italian Contaminated Sites) had examined the epidemiological literature (1998-2009) to a priori assess the strength of the causal association between environmental exposures and health outcomes.The a priori evaluation increases the confidence in the causal interpretation of the observed associations, containing the post hoc observations and multiple comparisons problems. We updated the evidence of SENTIERI Project adopting the GRADE approach for summarising and rating the overall quality of evidence in a transparent and systematic way. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of studies on the association between residence near a petrochemical plant/refinery and risk of lung cancer. We searched Pubmed, Embase and other databases to identify relevant studies (2010-2015). Three reviewers extracted data independently and assessed risk of bias-RoB using a modified version of the Cochrane risk of bias tool. For each study 9 domains (e.g. population selection, exposure assessment, confounding) were classified in terms of RoB (Low, Probably low, Probably high, High) and then, applying the GRADE, the quality of the overall evidence and the strength of evidence were rated. Results: We identified 1690 records, 7 studies met inclusion criteria. Out of the 9 items, exposure and confounding assessments were rated Probably High/High for risk of bias in 3 studies; in most domains the RoB was Probably Low/Low. The quality of overall evidence was rated as moderate and strength of evidence across all studies was classified as limited. Conclusions: SENTIERI Project adopted the GRADE methodology to update the a priori evaluation of the strength of the epidemiological evidence to be used in the interpretation of study results. This example responds to the demand in environmental health for the adoption of a structured, transparent and reproducible synthesis of the evidence, it also documents its feasibility.

Expert consensus on the use of human serum albumin in critically ill patients.

Evidence Evaluation Process and Management of Potential Conflicts of Interest: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

Clinical guidelines are evidence-based recommendations developed by healthcare organizations or expert panels to assist healthcare providers and patients in making appropriate and reliable decisions regarding specific health conditions, aiming to enhance the quality of healthcare by promoting best practices, reducing variations in care, and at the same time, allowing tailored clinical decision-making. European Hernia Society (EHS) guidelines aim to provide surgeons a reliable set of answers to their pertinent clinical questions and a tool to base their activity as experts in the management of abdominal wall defects. The traditional approach to guideline production is based on gathering key opinion leader in a particular field, to address a number of key questions, appraising papers, presenting evidence and produce final recommendations based on the literature and consensus. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method offers a transparent and structured process for developing and presenting evidence summaries and for carrying out the steps involved in developing recommendations. Its main strength lies in guiding complex judgments that balance the need for simplicity with the requirement for complete and transparent consideration of all important issues. EHS guidelines are of overall good quality but the application of GRADE method, began with EHS guidelines on open abdomen, and the increasing adherence to the process, has greatly improved the reliability of our guidelines. Currently, the need to application of this methodology and the creation of stable and dedicated group of researchers interested in following GRADE in the production of guidelines has been outlined in the literature. Considering that the production of clinical guidelines is a complex process, this paper aim to highlights the primary features of guideline production, GRADE methodology, the challenges associated with their adoption in the field of hernia surgery and the project of the EHS to establish a stable guidelines committee to provide technical and methodological support in update of previously published guideline or the creation of new ones.

Proposed PMR Guidelines Aim to Standardize Therapy

This narrative review analyses the Australian Guideline (2018) for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) developed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The Guideline recommended against the use low-level laser therapy (LLLT). Why this conclusion was reached is discussed in this review in the context of evidence provided in other systematic reviews, the latest of which was published in 2019 and which provided strong support for LLLT for knee OA. We evaluated the reference list cited for the recommendation “against” LLLT and compared this with reference lists of systematic reviews and studies published before and after the publication date of the Guideline. Eight randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of LLLT were cited in the Guideline the latest of which was published in 2012. There were seventeen additional RCTs, five of which together with one systematic review were located in the year of publication, 2018. The most recent systematic review in 2019 included 22 RCTs in its analysis. Discordance with the levels of evidence and recommendations was identified. Although GRADE methodology is said to be robust for systematically evaluating evidence and developing recommendations, many studies were not identified in the Guideline. In contrast, the latest systematic review and meta-analysis provides robust evidence for supporting the use of LLLT in knee OA. The conflict between guidelines based on opinion and evidence based on meta-analysis is highlighted. Given the totality of the evidence, we recommend that the Australian Guideline should be updated immediately to reflect a “for” recommendation.

BackgroundCatastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome (CAPS) is characterized by the rapid onset of widespread or multifocal large and/or small vessel thrombosis associated with multi-organ failure in patients meeting the serological criteria for...