Page 5 - e-book CPG - Bipolar Disorder

MANAGEMENT OF ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE
Level Study design LEVELS OF EVIDENCE
LEVELS OF EVIDENCE
Level Study design
I Level Study design
Properly powered and conducted randomised controlled trial; well-
Study design
Level
I I I conducted systematic review or meta-analysis of homogeneous
Properly powered and conducted randomised controlled trial; well-
Properly powered and conducted randomised controlled trial; well-
randomised controlled trials
conducted systematic review or meta-analysis of homogeneous
Properly powered and conducted randomised controlled trial; well-
conducted systematic review or meta-analysis of homogeneous
randomised controlled trials
randomised controlled trials
II -1 conducted systematic review or meta-analysis of homogeneous
Well-designed controlled trial without randomisation
randomised controlled trials
II -1 Well-designed controlled trial without randomisation
II-2
Well-designed cohort or case-control analysis study
Well-designed controlled trial without randomisation
II -1
II -1
Well-designed cohort or case-control analysis study
II-2 Well-designed controlled trial without randomisation
II-2
Well-designed cohort or case-control analysis study
II-3
Multiple time series, with or without the intervention; results from
II-2
uncontrolled studies that yield results of large magnitude
II-3 Well-designed cohort or case-control analysis study
Multiple time series, with or without the intervention; results from
II-3 Multiple time series, with or without the intervention; results from
II-3 Multiple time series, with or without the intervention; results from
uncontrolled studies that yield results of large magnitude
III uncontrolled studies that yield results of large magnitude
Opinions of respected authorities, based on clinical experience;
uncontrolled studies that yield results of large magnitude
III descriptive studies or case reports; reports of expert committees
Opinions of respected authorities, based on clinical experience;
III
Opinions of respected authorities, based on clinical experience;
III
Opinions of respected authorities, based on clinical experience;
descriptive studies or case reports; reports of expert committees
descriptive studies or case reports; reports of expert committees
Source: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Procedure Manual
descriptive studies or case reports; reports of expert committees
Rockville, MD: USPSTF; 2015.
Source: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Procedure Manual
Source: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Procedure Manual

Source: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Procedure Manual
Rockville, MD: USPSTF; 2015.
Rockville, MD: USPSTF; 2015.
Rockville, MD: USPSTF; 2015.

FORMULATION OF RECOMMENDATION

FORMULATION OF RECOMMENDATION
 In line with the new development in CPG methodology, the CPG Unit of MaHTAS is
FORMULATION OF RECOMMENDATION
FORMULATION OF RECOMMENDATION
adapting Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation
 In line with the new development in CPG methodology, the CPG Unit of MaHTAS is
 In line with the new development in CPG methodology, the CPG Unit of MaHTAS is
(GRADE) in its work process. The quality of body of evidence and related effect size are
adapting Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation
 In line with the new development in CPG methodology, the CPG Unit of MaHTAS is
adapting Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation
adapting Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation
carefully assessed/reviewed by the CPG DG.
(GRADE) in its work process. The quality of body of evidence and related effect size are
(GRADE) in its work process. The quality of body of evidence and related effect size are
(GRADE) in its work process. The quality of body of evidence and related effect size are
 Recommendations are formulated based on certainty of evidence and the wording
carefully assessed/reviewed by the CPG DG.
carefully assessed/reviewed by the CPG DG.
 Recommendations are formulated based on
used denotes the strength of recommendati certainty of evidence and
carefully assessed/reviewed by the CPG DG. ons. This takes into account: the wording
 Recommendations are formulated based on certainty of evidence and the wording
o quality and level of the evidence
used denotes the strength of recommendations. This takes into account:
 Recommendations are formulated based on certainty of evidence and the wording
used denotes the strength of recommendations. This takes into account:
o balance of benefits and harms of the options
used denotes the strength of recommendations. This takes into account:
o quality and level of the evidence
o quality and level of the evidence
o patient’s preference and values
o quality and level of the evidence the options
o balance of benefits and harms of
o balance of benefits and harms of the options
o resource implications
o balance of benefits and harms of the options
o patient’s preference and values
o patient’s preference and values
o relevancy and applicability to the local target population
o patient’s preference and values
o resource implications
o resource implications
 The more criteria being
o resource implications fulfilled, the more certain is the evidence leading to strong
o relevancy and applicability to the local target population
o relevancy and applicability to the local target population
recommendations using the word “should” being considered. Otherwise, weak
 The more criteria being fulfilled, the more certain is the
o relevancy and applicability to the local target population evidence leading to strong
 The more criteria being fulfilled, the more certain is the evidence leading to strong
recommendations use the word “may” in proposing an action to be made.
 The more criteria being fulfilled, the more certain is the evidence leading to strong
recommendations using the word “should” being considered. Otherwise, weak
recommendations using the word “should” being considered. Otherwise, weak
 In the CPG, a yellow box highlights important message(s) in the management
recommendations using the word “should” being considered. Otherwise, weak
recommendations use the word “may” in proposing an action to be made.
recommendations use the word “may” in proposing an action to be made.
recommendations use the word “may” in proposing an action to be made. he particular
while a blue box contains evidence-based recommendation(s) for t
 In the CPG, a yellow box highlights important message(s) in the management
 In the CPG, a yellow box highlights important message(s) in the management
condition.
while a blue box contains evidence-based recommendation(s) for the particular
 In the CPG, a yellow box highlights important message(s) in the management
while a blue box contains evidence-based recommendation(s) for the particular
while a blue box contains evidence-based recommendation(s) for the particular
condition.
condition.

condition.

i
i i
i

v