Clinicians can often find treatment recommendations in
traditional narrative reviews and the discussion sections of original
articles and meta-analyses. Making a treatment recommendation involves
framing a question, identifying management options and outcomes,
collecting and summarizing evidence, and applying value judgments or
preferences to arrive at an optimal course of action. Each step in this
process can be conducted systematically (thus protecting against bias)
or unsystematically (leaving the process open to bias). Clinicians
faced with a plethora of recommendations may wish to attend to those
that are less likely to be biased. Therefore, we propose a hierarchy of
rigor of recommendations to guide clinicians when judging the
usefulness of particular recommendations. Recommendations with the
highest rigor consider all relevant options and outcomes, include a
comprehensive collection of the methodologically highest quality data
with an explicit strategy for summarizing the data (that is, a
systematic review), and make an explicit statement of the values or
preferences involved in moving from evidence to action. High rigor
recommendations come from systematically developed, evidence-based
practice guidelines or rigorously conducted decision analyses.
Systematic reviews, which typically do not consider all relevant
options and outcomes or make the preferences underlying recommendations
explicit, offer intermediate rigor recommendations. Traditional
approaches in which the collection and assessment of evidence remains
unsystematic, all relevant options and outcomes may not be considered,
and values remain implicit, provide recommendations of weak rigor. In
an era in which clinicians are barraged by recommendations as to how to
manage their patients, this hierarchy provides a potentially useful set
Register and get free email Table of Contents alerts, saved searches, PowerPoint downloads, CME quizzes, and more
Subscribe for full-text access to content from 1998 forward and a host of useful features
Activate your current subscription (AMA members and current subscribers)
Purchase Online Access to this article for 24 hours
Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.
Download citation file:
Web of Science® Times Cited: 96
Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.
More Listings atJAMACareerCenter.com >
Users' Guides to the Medical Literature
Devereaux et al9 used a technique called probability tradeoff (including clear...
All results at
and access these and other features:
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a link to reset your password.
Enter your username and email address. We'll send instructions on how to reset your password to the email address we have on record.
Athens and Shibboleth are access management services that provide single sign-on to protected resources. They replace the multiple user names and passwords necessary to access subscription-based content with a single user name and password that can be entered once per session. It operates independently of a user's location or IP address. If your institution uses Athens or Shibboleth authentication, please contact your site administrator to receive your user name and password.