Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2013

Open Access 01-12-2013 | Research article

Current experience with applying the GRADE approach to public health interventions: an empirical study

Authors: Eva A Rehfuess, Elie A Akl

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach has been adopted by many national and international organisations as a systematic and transparent framework for evidence-based guideline development. With reference to an ongoing debate in the literature and within public health organisations, this study reviews current experience with the GRADE approach in rating the quality of evidence in the field of public health and identifies challenges encountered.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with individuals/groups that have applied the GRADE approach in the context of systematic reviews or guidelines in the field of public health, as well as with representatives of groups or organisations that actively decided against its use. We initially contacted potential participants by email. Responses were obtained by telephone interview or email, and written interview summaries were validated with participants. We analysed data across individual interviews to distil common themes and challenges.

Results

Based on 25 responses, we undertook 18 interviews and obtained 15 in-depth responses relating to specific systematic reviews or guideline projects; a majority of the latter were contributed by groups within the World Health Organization. All respondents that have used the GRADE approach appreciated the systematic and transparent process of assessing the quality of the evidence. However, respondents reported a range of minor and major challenges relating to complexity of public health interventions, choice of outcomes and outcome measures, ability to discriminate between different types of observational studies, use of non-epidemiological evidence, GRADE terminology and the GRADE and guideline development process. Respondents’ suggestions to make the approach more applicable to public health interventions included revisiting terminology, offering better guidance on how to apply GRADE to complex interventions and making modifications to the current grading scheme.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that GRADE principles are applicable to public health and well-received but also highlight common challenges. They provide a starting point for exploring options for improvements and, where applicable, testing these across different types of public health interventions. Several public health organisations are currently testing GRADE, and the GRADE Working Group is eager to engage with these groups to find ways to address concerns.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Rychetnik L, Hawe P, Waters E, Barratt A, Frommer M: A glossary for evidence based public health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004, 58: 538-545. 10.1136/jech.2003.011585.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rychetnik L, Hawe P, Waters E, Barratt A, Frommer M: A glossary for evidence based public health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004, 58: 538-545. 10.1136/jech.2003.011585.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference WHO: Adelaide Statement on Health in All Policies. 2010, Adelaide: World Health Organization and Government of South Australia WHO: Adelaide Statement on Health in All Policies. 2010, Adelaide: World Health Organization and Government of South Australia
3.
go back to reference Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008, 337: a1655-10.1136/bmj.a1655.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008, 337: a1655-10.1136/bmj.a1655.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Craig P, Cooper C, Gunnell D, Haw S, Lawson K, Macintyre S, et al: Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions: new Medical Research Council guidance. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012, Online First Craig P, Cooper C, Gunnell D, Haw S, Lawson K, Macintyre S, et al: Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions: new Medical Research Council guidance. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012, Online First
5.
go back to reference Glasziou P, Chalmers I, Rawlins M, McCulloch P: When are randomised trials unnecessary? Picking signal from noise. BMJ. 2007, 334: 349-351. 10.1136/bmj.39070.527986.68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Glasziou P, Chalmers I, Rawlins M, McCulloch P: When are randomised trials unnecessary? Picking signal from noise. BMJ. 2007, 334: 349-351. 10.1136/bmj.39070.527986.68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Kelly M, Morgan A, Ellis S, Younger T, Huntley J, Swann C: Evidence based public health: a review of the experience of the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) of developing public health guidance in England. Soc Sci Med. 2010, 71: 1056-1062. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.06.032.CrossRefPubMed Kelly M, Morgan A, Ellis S, Younger T, Huntley J, Swann C: Evidence based public health: a review of the experience of the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) of developing public health guidance in England. Soc Sci Med. 2010, 71: 1056-1062. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.06.032.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Lavis J, Posada F, Haines A, Osei E: Use of research to inform public policy-making. Lancet. 2004, 364: 1615-1621. 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17317-0.CrossRefPubMed Lavis J, Posada F, Haines A, Osei E: Use of research to inform public policy-making. Lancet. 2004, 364: 1615-1621. 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17317-0.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A: Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002, 56: 119-127. 10.1136/jech.56.2.119.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A: Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002, 56: 119-127. 10.1136/jech.56.2.119.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Thomson H, Hoskins R, Petticrew M, Ogilvie D, Craig N, Quinn T, et al: Evaluating the health effects of social interventions. BMJ. 2004, 328: 282-285. 10.1136/bmj.328.7434.282.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Thomson H, Hoskins R, Petticrew M, Ogilvie D, Craig N, Quinn T, et al: Evaluating the health effects of social interventions. BMJ. 2004, 328: 282-285. 10.1136/bmj.328.7434.282.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD: Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 9. Grading evidence and recommendations. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006, 4: 21-10.1186/1478-4505-4-21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Schünemann HJ, Fretheim A, Oxman AD: Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 9. Grading evidence and recommendations. Health Res Policy Syst. 2006, 4: 21-10.1186/1478-4505-4-21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Briss PA, Zaza S, Pappaioanou M, et al: Developing an Evidence-Based Guide to Community Preventive Services-Methods. Am J Prev Med. 2000, 18 (1S): Briss PA, Zaza S, Pappaioanou M, et al: Developing an Evidence-Based Guide to Community Preventive Services-Methods. Am J Prev Med. 2000, 18 (1S):
13.
go back to reference NICE: Methods for the development of NICE public health guidance. 2009, London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2 NICE: Methods for the development of NICE public health guidance. 2009, London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2
14.
go back to reference Brug J, van Dale D, Lanting L, Kremers S, Veenhof C, Leurs M, van Yperen T, Kok G: Towards evidence-based, quality-controlled health promotion: the Dutch recognition system for health promotion interventions. Health Educ Res. 2010, 25 (6): 1100-1106. 10.1093/her/cyq046.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Brug J, van Dale D, Lanting L, Kremers S, Veenhof C, Leurs M, van Yperen T, Kok G: Towards evidence-based, quality-controlled health promotion: the Dutch recognition system for health promotion interventions. Health Educ Res. 2010, 25 (6): 1100-1106. 10.1093/her/cyq046.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Brug J, Tak NI, Te Velde SJ: Evaluation of nationwide health promotion campaigns in the Netherlands: an exploration of practices, wishes and opportunities. Health Promot Int. 2011, 26 (2): 244-254. 10.1093/heapro/daq058.CrossRefPubMed Brug J, Tak NI, Te Velde SJ: Evaluation of nationwide health promotion campaigns in the Netherlands: an exploration of practices, wishes and opportunities. Health Promot Int. 2011, 26 (2): 244-254. 10.1093/heapro/daq058.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference GRADE Working Group: Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches. BMC Health Serv Res. 2004, 4 (1): 38-10.1186/1472-6963-4-38.CrossRef GRADE Working Group: Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches. BMC Health Serv Res. 2004, 4 (1): 38-10.1186/1472-6963-4-38.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman A, Vist GE, for the GRADE Working Group, et al: GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008, 336: 924-926. 10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Guyatt GH, Oxman A, Vist GE, for the GRADE Working Group, et al: GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008, 336: 924-926. 10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, et al: GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction – GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 64 (4): 383-394. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026.CrossRefPubMed Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, et al: GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction – GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 64 (4): 383-394. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al: GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 64 (4): 401-406. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015.CrossRefPubMed Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al: GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 64 (4): 401-406. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, et al: GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence – study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 4: 407-415.CrossRef Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, et al: GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence – study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 4: 407-415.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Barbui C, Dua T, van Ommeren M, et al: Challenges in developing evidence-based recommendations using the GRADE approach: The case of mental, neurological and substance use disorders. PLoS Med. 2010, 7 (8): e1000322-10.1371/journal.pmed.1000322.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Barbui C, Dua T, van Ommeren M, et al: Challenges in developing evidence-based recommendations using the GRADE approach: The case of mental, neurological and substance use disorders. PLoS Med. 2010, 7 (8): e1000322-10.1371/journal.pmed.1000322.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Duclos P, Durrheim DN, Reingold A, Bhutta Z, Vannice K, Rees H: Developing evidence-based immunizsation recommendations and GRADE. Vaccine. in press Duclos P, Durrheim DN, Reingold A, Bhutta Z, Vannice K, Rees H: Developing evidence-based immunizsation recommendations and GRADE. Vaccine. in press
25.
go back to reference Durrheim DN, Reingold A: Modifying the GRADE framework could benefit public health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010, 64: 387-10.1136/jech.2009.103226.CrossRefPubMed Durrheim DN, Reingold A: Modifying the GRADE framework could benefit public health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010, 64: 387-10.1136/jech.2009.103226.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference ECDC: Evidence-based methodologies for public health. 2011, Stockholm: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control ECDC: Evidence-based methodologies for public health. 2011, Stockholm: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control
27.
go back to reference Rehfuess EA, Bruce N, Prüss-Üstün A: GRADE For the advancement of public health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2011, 65: 559-CrossRefPubMed Rehfuess EA, Bruce N, Prüss-Üstün A: GRADE For the advancement of public health. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2011, 65: 559-CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Schünemann H, Hill S, Guyatt G, et al: The GRADE approach and Bradford Hill’s criteria for causation. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010, 65: 392e5- Schünemann H, Hill S, Guyatt G, et al: The GRADE approach and Bradford Hill’s criteria for causation. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010, 65: 392e5-
29.
go back to reference Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, et al: Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ. 2000, 321: 694-696. 10.1136/bmj.321.7262.694.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, et al: Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ. 2000, 321: 694-696. 10.1136/bmj.321.7262.694.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Collins LM, Chakraborty B, Murphy SA, Strecher V: Comparison of a phased experimental approach and a single randomized clinical trial for developing multicomponent behavioural interventions. Clin Trial. 2009, 6: 5-15. 10.1177/1740774508100973.CrossRef Collins LM, Chakraborty B, Murphy SA, Strecher V: Comparison of a phased experimental approach and a single randomized clinical trial for developing multicomponent behavioural interventions. Clin Trial. 2009, 6: 5-15. 10.1177/1740774508100973.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Hansen WB, Dusenbury L, Bishop D, Derzon JH: Substance abuse prevention program content: systematizing the classification of what programs target for change. Health Educ Res. 2007, 22 (3): 351-360.CrossRefPubMed Hansen WB, Dusenbury L, Bishop D, Derzon JH: Substance abuse prevention program content: systematizing the classification of what programs target for change. Health Educ Res. 2007, 22 (3): 351-360.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Victora C, Habicht J-P, Bryce J: Evidence-based public health: moving beyond randomised trials. Am J Public Health. 2004, 94 (3): 400-405. 10.2105/AJPH.94.3.400.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Victora C, Habicht J-P, Bryce J: Evidence-based public health: moving beyond randomised trials. Am J Public Health. 2004, 94 (3): 400-405. 10.2105/AJPH.94.3.400.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
go back to reference Nutbeam D: How does evidence influence public health policy? Tackling health inequalities in England. Health Promot J Aust. 2003, 14: 154-158. Nutbeam D: How does evidence influence public health policy? Tackling health inequalities in England. Health Promot J Aust. 2003, 14: 154-158.
34.
go back to reference Ogilvie D, Egan M, Hamilton V, Petticrew M: Promoting walking and cycling as an alternative to using cars: systematic review. BMJ. 2004, 329 (7469): 763-10.1136/bmj.38216.714560.55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ogilvie D, Egan M, Hamilton V, Petticrew M: Promoting walking and cycling as an alternative to using cars: systematic review. BMJ. 2004, 329 (7469): 763-10.1136/bmj.38216.714560.55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
go back to reference Waters E, Hall BJ, Armstrong R, Doyle J, Pettman TL, de Silva-Sanigorski A: Essential components of public health evidence reviews: capturing intervention complexity, implementation, economics and equity. J Public Health. 2011, 33 (3): 462-465. 10.1093/pubmed/fdr064.CrossRef Waters E, Hall BJ, Armstrong R, Doyle J, Pettman TL, de Silva-Sanigorski A: Essential components of public health evidence reviews: capturing intervention complexity, implementation, economics and equity. J Public Health. 2011, 33 (3): 462-465. 10.1093/pubmed/fdr064.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Howick J, Glasziou P, Aronson JK: The evolution of evidence hierarchies: what can Bradford Hill’s “guidelines for causation” contribute?. J R Soc Med. 2009, 102: 186-194. 10.1258/jrsm.2009.090020.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Howick J, Glasziou P, Aronson JK: The evolution of evidence hierarchies: what can Bradford Hill’s “guidelines for causation” contribute?. J R Soc Med. 2009, 102: 186-194. 10.1258/jrsm.2009.090020.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
go back to reference Akl EA, Kennedy C, Konda K, Caceres CF, Horvath T, Ayala G, et al: Using GRADE methodology for the development of public health guidelines for the prevention and treatment of HIV and other STIs among men who have sex with men and transgender people. BMC Publ Health. 2012, 12: 386-10.1186/1471-2458-12-386.CrossRef Akl EA, Kennedy C, Konda K, Caceres CF, Horvath T, Ayala G, et al: Using GRADE methodology for the development of public health guidelines for the prevention and treatment of HIV and other STIs among men who have sex with men and transgender people. BMC Publ Health. 2012, 12: 386-10.1186/1471-2458-12-386.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Akl EA, Maroun N, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Alsonso-Coello P, Vist GE, et al: Symbols were superior to numbers for presenting strength of recommendations to health care consumers: a randomized trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007, 60 (12): 1298-1305. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.011.CrossRefPubMed Akl EA, Maroun N, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Alsonso-Coello P, Vist GE, et al: Symbols were superior to numbers for presenting strength of recommendations to health care consumers: a randomized trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007, 60 (12): 1298-1305. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.011.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Current experience with applying the GRADE approach to public health interventions: an empirical study
Authors
Eva A Rehfuess
Elie A Akl
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2013
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

BMC Public Health 1/2013 Go to the issue