Skip to main content

Table 14 Example of an adapted Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) table for narrative systematic reviews of prognostic studies (filled in with examples of our own review illustrated in the boxes throughout this manuscript)

From: Judging the quality of evidence in reviews of prognostic factor research: adapting the GRADE framework

Outcome: Headache persistence
     Univariate Multivariate GRADE factors   
Potential prognostic factors identified Number of participants Number of studies Number of cohorts + 0 - + 0 - Phase Study limitations Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Publication bias Moderate/large effect size Dose effect Overall quality
Headache intensity 536 3 [2224] 3 1 2 0     1 +
Age 867 3 [2628] 3 1 2 0     1 +
Type of headache diagnosis 249 3 [24, 30, 31] 3 2 1 0     1 +
Menstruation 449 1 [22] 1 0 1 0     1 Unclear +
Sex 3,272 4 [28, 3840] 4 1 2 0 1 3 0 1 +++
Family history of pain 654 2 [38, 44] 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 +
  1. Phase, phase of investigation. For uni- and multivariate analyses: +, number of significant effects with a positive value; 0, number of non-significant effects; -, number of significant effects with a negative value. For GRADE factors: , no serious limitations; ✕, serious limitations (or not present for moderate/large effect size, dose effect); unclear, unable to rate item based on available information. For overall quality of evidence: +, very low; ++, low; +++, moderate; ++++, high.