Citations 20

Study protocol for developing the evaluation instrument of guideline adherence to GRADE approach (GRADE-Check)

BMJ Open | November 10, 2025 | Volume: 15 | Issue: 11 | Pages: e105534

10.1136/bmjopen-2025-105534 | PMID 41213689

Introduction Many clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) claim to use Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, but its implementation varies. This suggests that CPG developers, methodologists and users would benefit from an instrument to evaluate the extent to which CPGs adhere to GRADE approach. Such a structured instrument is currently unavailable. Accordingly, this study will develop an evaluation instrument for assessing guideline adherence to the GRADE approach, which we have named ‘GRADE-Check’. The goal is to target items to which CPGs fail to adhere and that potentially have serious consequences resulting in inaccuracies in certainty of evidence and inappropriate direction or strength of recommendations, thereby discriminating across CPGs in issues of importance. Methods and analysis The panel will include up to 25 individuals with specific knowledge and expertise, including experienced authors, educators and methodologists on CPGs methodology and GRADE approach from relevant organisations. The instrument will focus on the key elements of GRADE, aiming for clarity for GRADE experts and non-GRADE experts to apply. The development process for GRADE-Check will consist of the following five phases: (1) recruitment of a panel of GRADE experts; (2) development of objectives and scope for the development of GRADE-Check and criteria for item selection; (3) generation of candidate items through a literature review and panel consultation; (4) panellist discussion to construct the initial draft and extended explanation manual and (5) user testing. Ethics and dissemination This study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University (no. (2025047K)). Our research findings will be published in peer-reviewed journal articles and presented at academic conferences. Additionally, the dissemination plan will include considerations for the development of implementation manuals, a dedicated project website and training tools.
050 Vertical reviews – informing policy decisions on clinical vs community-oriented approaches to prevent disease – a potential path to reduce overdiagnosis?

050 Vertical reviews – informing policy decisions on clinical vs community-oriented approaches to prevent disease – a potential | September 9, 2025 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: A25.2-A25

10.1136/ebm-2025-pod.50

Cardiovascular, kidney related, and weight loss effects of therapeutics for type 2 diabetes: a living clinical practice guideline

BMJ | August 15, 2025 | Volume: 390 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: e082071

10.1136/bmj-2024-082071 | PMID 40813129

Abstract Clinical question What are the benefits and harms of medications for adults with type 2 diabetes at varied risks of cardiovascular and kidney related complications? Context Emerging clinical trials of novel medications have demonstrated benefits on cardiovascular, kidney, and weight related outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes. Dynamically updated practice guidelines adhering to standards of trustworthiness are necessary in response to a rapidly evolving evidence base and the availability of multiple medication alternatives. This living practice guideline incorporates the latest available medications and evidence and provides recommendations stratified by risks of cardiovascular and kidney complications to inform diabetes management. Recommendations The panel issued risk-stratified recommendations regarding four prioritised medications for adults with type 2 diabetes (SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, finerenone and tirzepatide): • Lower risk (three or fewer cardiovascular risk factors without established cardiovascular disease (CVD) or chronic kidney disease (CKD)): weak recommendation against SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists. • Moderate risk (more than three cardiovascular risk factors without established CVD or CKD; or established CVD and/or CKD at lower risk of complications): weak recommendation in favour of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists; and a weak recommendation against finerenone in adults with CKD. • Higher risk (established CVD and/or CKD at higher risk of complications, or established heart failure): strong recommendation in favour of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists; and a weak recommendation in favour of finerenone in adults with CKD. • Across risk strata: weak recommendation in favour of tirzepatide in adults with obesity. About this guideline and how it was created An international panel including two patient partners, clinicians, and methodologists produced these recommendations. The panel followed standards for trustworthy guidelines and used the GRADE approach, explicitly considering the balance of benefits, harms and burdens of treatment from an individual patient perspective. Recommendations were informed by a linked living systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluating relative benefits and harms updated to 31 July 2024; and by linked systematic reviews addressing risk prediction models and values and preferences of adults with type 2 diabetes. Candidate therapeutics are prioritised based on availability of sufficient randomised trial data, relevance to a global audience and likelihood of changing practice. This is the first version of the living guideline. The guideline is part of the BMJ Rapid Recommendations series. MAGICapp displays the most recent version of the guideline and full content including evidence summaries and decision aids; major updates will be published in The BMJ . We encourage re-use, adaptation and translation of these living guidelines, and recognise that the lack of availability or high costs of some medications may be prohibitive and will impact on how these recommendations are implemented across different health care systems.
Core GRADE 7: principles for moving from evidence to recommendations and decisions

BMJ | June 3, 2025 | Volume: 389 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: e083867

10.1136/bmj-2024-083867 | PMID 40461180

Core GRADE 6: presenting the evidence in summary of findings tables

BMJ | May 27, 2025 | Volume: 389 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: e083866

10.1136/bmj-2024-083866 | PMID 40425239

Core GRADE 5: rating certainty of evidence—assessing indirectness

BMJ | May 20, 2025 | Volume: 389 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: e083865

10.1136/bmj-2024-083865 | PMID 40393729

Core GRADE 4: rating certainty of evidence—risk of bias, publication bias, and reasons for rating up certainty

BMJ | May 13, 2025 | Volume: 389 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: e083864

10.1136/bmj-2024-083864 | PMID 40360206

Core GRADE 3: rating certainty of evidence—assessing inconsistency

BMJ | May 6, 2025 | Volume: 389 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: e081905

10.1136/bmj-2024-081905 | PMID 40328467

Core GRADE 2: choosing the target of certainty rating and assessing imprecision

BMJ | April 29, 2025 | Volume: 389 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: e081904

10.1136/bmj-2024-081904 | PMID 40300802

Core GRADE 1: overview of the Core GRADE approach

BMJ | April 22, 2025 | Volume: 389 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: e081903

10.1136/bmj-2024-081903 | PMID 40262844