Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS) · Technical Documents

Health system and public health evidence to recommendations framework

Organisation mondiale de la santé
Voir le document original

Le texte intégral est hébergé par l’organisation qui le publie. lawenc.com indexe les métadonnées et renvoie vers la source officielle.

Texte intégral

WHO/HIV/2014.23 ©World Health Organization 2014 Health system and public health evidence to recommendations framework

[Question]? Problem: [Problem] Option: [Option] Comparison: [Comparison] Setting: [Setting] CRITERIA Is the problem a priority? Are a large number of people affected? JUDGEMENTS No Probably No Uncertain Probably Yes Yes Varies

Background: [Background]

RESEARCH EVIDENCE

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

[Evidence]

[Additional information]

P RO B LE M

No

Probably No

Uncertain

Probably Yes

Yes

Varies

[Evidence]

[Additional information]

HSPH EtR framework (Version 2): [Short title]

1

Problem: [Problem]

Option: [Option]

Comparison: [Comparison]

Setting: [Setting]

CRITERIA Are the desirable anticipated effects large?

JUDGEMENTS

RESEARCH EVIDENCE

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

No

Probably No

Uncertain

Probably Yes

Yes

Varies

Summary of findings: [Comparison] Outcome Without [intervention] (per [#####] With [intervention] (per [#####]) Difference (per [#####] (95%CI) Relative effect (RR) (95%CI) RR [#.##] ([#.##] to [#.##]) RR [#.##] ([#.##] to [#.##] RR [#.##] ([#.##] to [#.##]

B E NE F IT S & HA RM S O F T HE O P T IO NS

Are the undesirable anticipated effects small?

Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) [Rating] [Rating] [Rating]

No

Probably No

Uncertain

Probably Yes

Yes

Varies

[Outcome] [Outcome] [Outcome]

[#####] [#####] [#####]

[#####] [#####] [#####]

[#####] more/less [#####] more/less [#####] more/less

[Additional information]

What is the overall certainty of this evidence?

No included studies

Very low

Low

Moderate

High

Link to detailed evidence profile

HSPH EtR framework (Version 2): [Short title]

2

Problem: [Problem]

Option: [Option]

Comparison: [Comparison]

Setting: [Setting]

CRITERIA

JUDGEMENTS

RESEARCH EVIDENCE The relative importance or values of the main outcomes of interest:

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

How certain is the relative importance of the desirable and undesirable outcomes? V A LUE S

Possibly Important important uncertainty uncertainty or variability or variability

Probably no No important important No known uncertainty uncertainty undesirable or variability or variability outcomes

Outcome

Relative importance

Certainty of the evidence

[Outcome] [Outcome] [Outcome] [Outcome]

No evidence No evidence No evidence No evidence

-

[Additional information]

Are the desirable effects large relative to undesirable effects?

No

Probably No

Uncertain

Probably Yes

Yes

Varies

[Evidence]

[Additional information]

HSPH EtR framework (Version 2): [Short title]

3

Problem: [Problem]

Option: [Option]

Comparison: [Comparison]

Setting: [Setting]

CRITERIA Are the resources required small? Is the incremental cost small relative to the net benefits? What would be the impact on health inequities?

JUDGEMENTS No Probably No Uncertain Probably Yes Yes Varies

RESEARCH EVIDENCE

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

RE S O URCE US E

[Evidence]

[Additional information]

No

Probably No

Uncertain

Probably Yes

Yes

Varies

[Evidence]

[Additional information]

E Q UIT Y

Increased Probably Uncertain Probably Reduced Varies increased reduced

[Evidence]

[Additional information]

A CCE P T A B ILIT Y

Is the option acceptable to key stakeholders?

No

Probably No

Uncertain

Probably Yes

Yes

Varies

[Evidence]

[Additional information]

F E A S IB ILIT Y

Is the option feasible to implement?

No

Probably No

Uncertain

Probably Yes

Yes

Varies

[Evidence]

[Additional information]

HSPH EtR framework (Version 2): [Short title]

4

Problem: [Problem]

Option: [Option]

Comparison: [Comparison]

Setting: [Setting]

Balance of consequences

Undesirable consequences clearly outweigh desirable consequences in most settings

Undesirable consequences probably outweigh desirable consequences in most settings

The balance between desirable and undesirable consequences is closely balanced or uncertain

Desirable consequences probably outweigh undesirable consequences in most settings

Desirable consequences clearly outweigh undesirable consequences in most settings

Type of recommendation

We recommend against the option

We suggest considering the option Only in the context of rigorous research Only with targeted monitoring and evaluation Only in specific contexts

We recommend the option

Recommendation (text)

[Recommendation]

Justification Implementation

[Justification] [Implementation considerations]

considerations

Monitoring and evaluation [Monitoring and evaluation] Research priorities [Research priorities]

HSPH EtR framework (Version 2): [Short title]

5

Problem: [Problem]

Option: [Option]

Comparison: [Comparison]

Setting: [Setting]

Evidence profile [title] Author(s): [Authors] Date: [YYYY-MM-DD] Question: [Question] Settings: [Setting] Bibliography: [Citation text] [Insert GRADE evidence profile] (Return)

HSPH EtR framework (Version 2): [Short title]

6

Problem: [Problem]

Option: [Option]

Comparison: [Comparison]

Setting: [Setting]

References (To make references appear here, place cursor in any text above this page and choose: Insert > Footnote…> Endnote > End of section)

HSPH EtR framework (Version 2): [Short title]

7

Explanations

Definitions for ratings of the certainty of the evidence (GRADE)** Ratings Definitions This research provides a very good indication of the likely effect. The likelihood that the effect will be substantially different* is low. This research provides a good indication of the likely effect. The likelihood that the effect will be substantially different4 is moderate. This research provides some indication of the likely effect. However, the likelihood that it will be substantially different4 is high. This research does not provide a reliable indication of the likely effect. The likelihood that the effect will be substantially different4 is very high. Implications This evidence provides a very good basis for making a decision about whether to implement the intervention. Impact evaluation and monitoring of the impact are unlikely to be needed if it is implemented. This evidence provides a good basis for making a decision about whether to implement the intervention. Monitoring of the impact is likely to be needed and impact evaluation may be warranted if it is implemented. This evidence provides some basis for making a decision about whether to implement the intervention. Impact evaluation is likely to be warranted if it is implemented. This evidence does not provide a good basis for making a decision about whether to implement the intervention. Impact evaluation is very likely to be warranted if it is implemented.

High

Moderate Low Very low

*Substantially different: large enough difference that it might have an effect on a decision **The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group began in the year 2000 as an informal collaboration of people with an interest in addressing the shortcomings of present grading systems in health care. The working group has developed a common, sensible and transparent approach to grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Many international organizations have provided input into the development of the approach and have started using it.

(Return)

For most recent version of this framework (and additional frameworks): www.decide-collaboration.eu/WP5/Strategies/Framework

HSPH EtR framework (Version 2)

8

Informations clés
Type de document Technical Documents
Date d'adoption
Source Organisation mondiale de la santé