• Paul E Alexander, Juan P Brito, Ignacio Neumann, Michael R Gionfriddo, Lisa Bero, Benjamin Djulbegovic, Rebecca Stoltzfus, Victor M Montori, Susan L Norris, Holger J Schünemann, and Gordon H Guyatt.
• Health Research Methods (HRM), Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Health Sciences Building (HSB), 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5, Canada. Electronic address: elias98_99@yahoo.com.
• J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Apr 1; 72: 98-106.

ObjectivesIn 2007 the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted the GRADE system for development of public health guidelines. Previously we found that many strong recommendations issued by WHO are based on evidence for which there is only low or very low confidence in the estimates of effect (discordant recommendations). GRADE guidance indicates that such discordant recommendations are rarely appropriate but suggests five paradigmatic situations in which discordant recommendations may be warranted. We sought to provide insight into the many discordant recommendations in WHO guidelines.Study Design And SettingWe examined all guidelines that used the GRADE method and were approved by the WHO Guideline Review Committee between 2007 and 2012. Teams of reviewers independently abstracted data from eligible guidelines and classified recommendations either into one of the five paradigms for appropriately-formulated discordant recommendations or into three additional categories in which discordant recommendations were inconsistent with GRADE guidance: 1) the evidence warranted moderate or high confidence (a misclassification of evidence) rather than low or very low confidence; 2) good practice statements; or 3) uncertainty in the estimates of effect would best lead to a conditional (weak) recommendation.ResultsThe 33 eligible guidelines included 160 discordant recommendations, of which 98 (61.3%) addressed drug interventions and 132 (82.5%) provided some rationale (though not entirely explicit at times) for the strong recommendation. Of 160 discordant recommendations, 25 (15.6%) were judged consistent with one of the five paradigms for appropriate recommendations; 33 (21%) were based on evidence warranting moderate or high confidence in the estimates of effect; 29 (18%) were good practice statements; and 73 (46%) warranted a conditional, rather than a strong recommendation.ConclusionWHO discordant recommendations are often inconsistent with GRADE guidance, possibly threatening the integrity of the process. Further training in GRADE methods for WHO guideline development group members may be necessary, along with further research on what motivates the formulation of such recommendations.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

16 keywords...

hide…