Selected article for: "dose response relation and large magnitude"
Author: Zijun Wang; Qi Zhou; Chenglin Wang; Qianling Shi; Shuya Lu; Yanfang Ma; Xufei Luo; Yangqin Xun; Weiguo Li; Muna Baskota; Yinmei Yang; Hui Zhai; Toshio Fukuoka; Hyeong Sik Ahn; Myeong Soo Lee; Zhengxiu Luo; Enmei Liu; Yaolong Chen
Title: Clinical Characteristics of Children with COVID-19: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis
  • Document date: 2020_4_17
    • ID: jsjxdmi2_12
    Snippet: Two reviewers (Q Zhou and Y Xun) assessed the quality of main evidence independently using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. We produced a "Summary of Findings" table using the GRADE pro software (24, 25). Direct evidence from RCTs is first set as high quality, and evidence from observational studies as low quality. Then initial quality can then be downgraded for five reasons (study limitations, c.....
    Document: Two reviewers (Q Zhou and Y Xun) assessed the quality of main evidence independently using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. We produced a "Summary of Findings" table using the GRADE pro software (24, 25). Direct evidence from RCTs is first set as high quality, and evidence from observational studies as low quality. Then initial quality can then be downgraded for five reasons (study limitations, consistency of effect, imprecision, indirectness, and publication bias) and upgraded for three reasons (large magnitude of effect, dose-response relation and plausible confounders or biases) (26-31). Finally, the quality of main evidence can be classified as high, moderate, low, or very low, which reflects the extent to what we can be confident that the effect estimates are correct.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • direct evidence and main evidence: 1, 2, 3
    • direct evidence and main evidence quality: 1
    • direct evidence and observational study: 1, 2, 3, 4
    • direct evidence and publication bias: 1, 2
    • dose response and low quality: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
    • dose response and observational study: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
    • dose response and publication bias: 1, 2, 3, 4
    • dose response relation and low quality: 1
    • dose response relation and publication bias: 1, 2
    • effect estimate and low quality: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
    • effect estimate and main evidence: 1
    • effect estimate and main evidence quality: 1
    • effect estimate and observational study: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
    • effect estimate and publication bias: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
    • effect large magnitude and low quality: 1
    • effect large magnitude and publication bias: 1, 2
    • Evaluation Development Recommendations Assessment grade tool and low quality: 1
    • Evaluation Development Recommendations Assessment grade tool and observational study: 1
    • Evaluation Development Recommendations Assessment grade tool and publication bias: 1