Stage 5; Estimating the risk

From FemWIKI
Revision as of 20:53, 18 December 2022 by Bosmana fem (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{| class="wikitable" |- ! Checklist 3: Evaluating the quality of evidence (for information tables) |- | Quality of evidence = confidence in information; design, quality and ot...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Checklist 3: Evaluating the quality of evidence (for information tables)
Quality of evidence = confidence in information; design, quality and other factors assessed and judged on consistency, relevance and validity. Grade: good, satisfactory, unsatisfactor Examples of types of information/evidence
Good Further research unlikely to change confidence in information. Peer-reviewed published studies where design and analysis reduce bias, e.g. systematic reviews, randomised control trials, outbreak reports using analytical epidemiology

Textbooks regarded as definitive sources Expert group risk assessments, or specialised expert knowledge, or consensus opinion of experts

Satisfactory

Further research likely to have impact on confidence of information and may change assessment. || Non-peer-reviewed published studies/reports Observational studies/surveillance reports/outbreak reports Individual (expert) opinion

Unsatisfactory

Further research very likely to have impact on confidence of information and likely to change assessment. || Individual case reports Grey literature Individual (non-expert) opinion