Grading evidence and recommendationsfor public health interventions: developing and pilotinga framework

The objective of this work was to develop a practical scale of grades of recommendation for public health interventions, adapted from the current National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) methodology. A literature review was carried out on the subject of incorporating research evidence into grades of recommendation for public health interventions. The literature search looked at publications from January 2000– May 2004 retrieved from 16 databases. The views of a range of public health experts were also sought for suggestions of other publications to be included in the literature review, and for their comments at various stages of the developing methodology. The principles for development of the framework were that it should be: • Adapted from, and clearly linked to, the current NICE methodology • Based on detailed and transparent reporting and synthesis of all relevant supporting evidence (intervention and observation; quantitative and qualitative). The literature review indicated general agreement that the randomised controlled trial (RCT) has the highest internal validity and, where feasible, is the research design of choice when evaluating effectiveness. However, many commentators felt the RCT may be too restrictive for some public health interventions, particularly community based programmes. In addition, supplementing data from quantitative studies with the results of qualitative research is regarded as key to the successful replication and ultimate effectiveness of interventions. Based on the literature review and consultation with experts, a framework was developed that derives grades of recommendation, incorporating: • Strength of evidence of effi cacy based on the research design and the quality and quantity of evidence (the current NICE system) • Corroborative evidence (from observational and qualitative studies) for the feasibility and likelihood of success of an intervention if implemented in the UK. The precise methods for combining the results from different types of corroborative evidence and for incorporating the size of effects, including (cost–)benefi ts and harms for the different outcomes measured, are still in development. This provisional framework provides a practical and transparent method for deriving grades of recommendation for public health interventions, based on a synthesis of all relevant supporting evidence from research. The methodology is being piloted, alongside the current NICE methodology, within the development of the public health/ prevention aspects of the HDA/NICE guidance on overweight and obesity.

[1]  Robert L. Berg,et al.  American Journal of Preventive Medicine , 1986, The American Journal of Medicine.

[2]  Sandy Oliver,et al.  An Emerging Framework for Including Different Types of Evidence in Systematic Reviews for Public Policy , 2005 .

[3]  Michael P. Kelly,et al.  Economic Appraisal of Public Health Interventions , 2005 .

[4]  Elizabeth Waters,et al.  Guidelines for systematic reviews of health promotion and public health interventions. , 2005 .

[5]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group , 2004, BMC health services research.

[6]  E. Waters,et al.  Harnessing Support for Prioritised Cochrane Reviews in Health Promotion and Public Health - Update from the Cochrane Health Promotion and Public Health Field , 2004, Promotion & education.

[7]  Sandy Oliver,et al.  Applying systematic review methods to studies of people’s views: an example from public health research , 2004, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[8]  Alan Shiell,et al.  Complex interventions: how “out of control” can a randomised controlled trial be? , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[10]  H Boeing,et al.  History of the concept of ‘levels of evidence’ and their current status in relation to primary prevention through lifestyle interventions , 2004, Public Health Nutrition.

[11]  Sandy Oliver,et al.  Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  J. Bryce,et al.  Evidence-based public health: moving beyond randomized trials. , 2004, American journal of public health.

[13]  Paul Glasziou,et al.  Assessing the quality of research , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Realist synthesis - an introduction , 2004 .

[15]  D. Wanless Securing Good Health for the Whole Population , 2004 .

[16]  Alex J. Sutton,et al.  Integrative approaches to qualitative and quantitative evidence , 2004 .

[17]  J. Byles,et al.  Using socioeconomic evidence in clinical practice guidelines , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[18]  Douglas R. Wilson,et al.  Development and testing of a framework for assessing the effectiveness of health promotion , 2003, Sozial- und Präventivmedizin/Social and Preventive Medicine.

[19]  H Roberts,et al.  Evidence, hierarchies, and typologies: horses for courses , 2003, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[20]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials , 2001, The Lancet.

[21]  Sandy Oliver,et al.  Children and healthy eating: a systematic review of barriers and facilitators , 2003 .

[22]  No 1 Assessing the quality of evidence in evidence-based policy : why , how and when ? , 2003 .

[23]  David Evans,et al.  Hierarchy of evidence: a framework for ranking evidence evaluating healthcare interventions. , 2003, Journal of clinical nursing.

[24]  K. Stronks Generating evidence on interventions to reduce inequalities in health: the Dutch case , 2002, Scandinavian journal of public health. Supplement.

[25]  Task Force on Community Preventive Services Recommendations to increase physical activity in communities. , 2002, American journal of preventive medicine.

[26]  M. Frommer,et al.  Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions , 2002, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[27]  M Joffe,et al.  A framework for the evidence base to support Health Impact Assessment , 2002, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[28]  A. Truswell Levels and kinds of evidence for public-health nutrition , 2001, The Lancet.

[29]  M. Sjöström,et al.  Developing an evidence-based approach to Public Health Nutrition: translating evidence into policy , 2001, Public Health Nutrition.

[30]  K. Glanz,et al.  Searching for Evidence about Health Education and Health Behavior Interventions , 2001, Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education.

[31]  R. J. Neuberger Where's the evidence?—Making the case for public health , 2001, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[32]  Elizabeth M. L. Towner,et al.  What works in preventing unintentional injuries in children and young adolescents? An updated systematic review , 2001 .

[33]  M. Lean,et al.  Is long-term weight loss possible? , 2000, British Journal of Nutrition.

[34]  Gordon Macdonald A new evidence framework for health promotion practice , 2000 .

[35]  K. Tones Evaluating health promotion: a tale of three errors. , 2000, Patient education and counseling.

[36]  Patricia Dolan Mullen,et al.  Developing an Evidence-Based Guide to Community Preventive Services—Methods , 2000 .

[37]  R. Glasgow,et al.  Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. , 1999, American journal of public health.

[38]  Judith Stephenson,et al.  Why do we need randomised controlled trials to assess behavioural interventions? , 1998, BMJ.

[39]  D Johnston,et al.  Implications of the results of community intervention trials. , 1998, Annual Review of Public Health.

[40]  Andrew V. Dane,et al.  Program integrity in primary and early secondary prevention: are implementation effects out of control? , 1998, Clinical psychology review.

[41]  Don Nutbeam,et al.  Evaluating Health Promotion—Progress, Problems and solutions , 1998 .

[42]  B. Charlton,et al.  The four levels of health promotion: an integrated approach. , 1993, Public health.