Video: Knock on Wood| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Lupus Nephritis
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

The Why & What of the ACR’s Clinical Practice Guidelines

Ruth Jessen Hickman, MD  |  Issue: February 2018  |  February 18, 2018

Dr. Caplan

Dr. Caplan

Dr. Caplan explains that the GRADE format helps the guideline developers avoid vague concepts while shaping specific recommendations around choices that clinicians address. “The PICO questions articulate medical scenarios in a very structured format, and then evidence is gathered around that scenario.” PICO questions are one evidence-based model used to help frame clear questions. PICO questions must specify the Patient population addressed, the Intervention, the Comparison and the Outcome(s) being examined in a specific clinical situation.

Each PICO-based recommendation receives a strong or a conditional recommendation for or against a specific intervention, as determined by the voting panel. Each recommendation also receives a level of evidence rating: very low, low, medium or high.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Four factors influence the strength of a recommendation under the GRADE method. These are the quality of the evidence, the balance between intervention benefits and risks/harms, cost and variability in patient values and preferences. A weakness in one of these areas can still result in a strong recommendation if the other criteria are convincingly robust. Conversely, an intervention that is particularly impressive in one area may receive only a conditional recommendation if other factors make it less desirable.

Example: For patients with established rheumatoid arthritis and low disease activity who have never taken a disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD), the 2015 GRADE-based rheumatoid arthritis guidelines give a strong recommendation for DMARD therapy (preferably methotrexate) over a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor. However, the evidence is of relatively low quality. The justification for this strong recommendation is that DMARD therapy is less expensive and has an extensive safety record with well-documented efficacy in clinical experience.3

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Dr. Neogi provides a different type of example, “If something is astronomically expensive, and the benefits are only incremental above other more cost-effective treatments, you wouldn’t give that one a strong recommendation as first-line therapy, even if the randomized controlled trial showed that it was superior to placebo.”

Each recommendation also receives an evaluation in terms of the evidence quality, based on the available data. Using specific software tailored to GRADE assessment, reviewers use the GRADE criteria to assess the quality of the available evidence. This grading incor­porates a number of different characteristics, including the number and specific types (randomized controlled trials, observational, etc.) of studies available, risk of bias in included studies, inconsistency of study results, indirectness of evidence and imprecision.

In other words, GRADE assessment not only considers the trial type but also the level of quality of those studies in relation to the clinical question being asked in the guideline. As Dr. Caplan explains, “In GRADE, a really well done observational study could be increased in terms of its value. In contrast, a poorly developed randomized controlled trial with major potential for bias could be downgraded in its quality.” In addition, a high-quality study might be downgraded slightly in the guideline evidence report because the questions it addresses aren’t exactly the same as those in the guideline.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Single Page
Share: 

Filed under:Practice Support Tagged with:Clinical Practice GuidelinesThe American College of Rheumatology

Related Articles
    Dr. Caplan turned 106 on Nov. 21 and remains physically and mentally active.

    Paul S. Caplan, MD: A Physician’s Journey

    March 8, 2020

    Editor’s note: It is with much sadness that we learned this morning that Paul Caplan, MD, passed away yesterday, March 7, 2020. “He was a remarkable person who continued to celebrate life up to the end,” says Terence W. Starz, MD, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine. “He had a great caring, wisdom, and commitment…

    Alisusha; Trueffelpix / shutterstock.com

    3 New Vasculitis Guidelines Discussed

    May 13, 2021

    The ACR, in concert with the Vasculitis Foundation, released three new vasculitis guidelines online first in July, with a fourth slated for publication by the end of the year. These are the first ever to be produced and endorsed by the ACR and the Vasculitis Foundation. Although most of the recommendations are conditional, due to…

    Vasculitis Guidelines in Focus, Part 6: Giant Cell Arteritis

    September 27, 2022

    In 2021, the ACR—in concert with the Vasculitis Foundation (VF)—released four new vasculitis guidelines, one each on: 1) anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA) associated vasculitis, 2) giant cell arteritis (GCA) and Takayasu arteritis, 3) polyarteritis nodosa and 4) Kawasaki disease. The guideline development process is complex. For the vasculitis guidelines, this process kicked off in June…

    Updated Perioperative Guideline Released: Recommendations Balance Risks of Infection & Disease Flare

    September 13, 2022

    The 2017 recommendations are updated to reflect changes in medical literature, as well as to include newly approved drugs.

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences