Stage 5; Estimating the risk
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 |