Comparative Effectiveness of In-Hospital Use of Recombinant Factor VIIa for Off-Label Indications vs. Usual Care
Rating the Strength of Evidence From the CER
The EPC GRADE approach, based on the standard GRADE approach, was used to assess the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome. The overall strength of evidence was graded as high (further research is very unlikely to change the confidence in the estimate of effect), moderate (further research may change the confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate), low (further research is likely to change the confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate), or insufficient (evidence either is unavailable or does not permit estimation of an effect). The authors also independently evaluated the applicability to real-world practice of the total body of evidence within a given clinical indication using the PICOTS framework (population, intervention, comparator, outcome, timing, and setting).
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Methods reference guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews, Version 1.0. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Research and Quality; Draft Posted October 2007. Available at: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/repFiles/2007_10DraftMethodsGuide.pdf.
- Brozek J, Oxman A, Schünemann H, for the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. GRADEpro [computer program]. Version 3.2 for Windows. 2008. Available at: http://www.cc-ims.net/revman/other-resources/gradepro/gradepro.
- Yank V, Tuohy CV, Logan AC, et al. Comparative Effectiveness of In-Hospital Use of Recombinant Factor VIIa for Off-Label Indications vs. Usual Care, Comparative Effectiveness Review 21 (Prepared by Stanford–UCSF Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0017). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; May 2010. AHRQ Publication No. 10-EHC030-EF.
Your slide tray is being processed.