Table B-2[Intervention A] vs. [Intervention B] for the treatment of [Disease]: Details regarding strength of evidence domains

Outcome

Strength of Evidence Grade
Study Design
No. Studiesa
(N)
Risk of Bias of Individual StudiesRating and Reasons for Domain Scores
Descriptions of Other Issues
Comments About Derivation of Overall Strength of Evidence
Finding and Strength of Evidence
Severity of [Disease]

Low
RCT:
3
(110)
1 Low
2 Medium
Study limitations: Medium. Unclear assessor blinding in one study; high attrition rates in two studies.
Consistency: Consistent.
Precision: Imprecise, confidence interval surrounding the risk ratio for one of the studies crossed 1.0.
Reporting bias: Suspected. Inconsistent analyses of both single and composite (multiple endpoints combined) outcomes raises concerns.
Other concerns: None
Intervention A reduced the severity of [disease] more than intervention B.
a

Five high-risk-of-bias studies did not contribute to the final strength of evidence assessment.

Abbreviations: RCT = randomized controlled trial.

Five high-risk-of-bias studies did not contribute to the final strength of evidence assessment.

From: Grading the Strength of a Body of Evidence When Assessing Health Care Interventions for the Effective Health Care Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: An Update

Cover of Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews
Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews [Internet].

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.