Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Vernooij, RWM
• Guyatt, GH
• Zeraatkar, D
• Han, MA
• Valli, C
• El Dib, R
• Alonso-Coello, P
• Bala, MM
• Johnston, BC

Titel

Reconciling contrasting guideline recommendations on red and processed meat for health outcomes

Ist Teil von

• Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2021-10, Vol.138, p.215-218

Ort / Verlag

Elmsford: Elsevier Inc

Erscheinungsjahr

2021

Quelle

Alma/SFX Local Collection

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• [...]although medical science has made great strides during the last century, the progress was accompanied by disastrous errors in which the medical community became convinced of health interventions that were in fact harmful. The system, which is called “GRADE” (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations), has generated considerable enthusiasm and uptake, and is now in use by over 110 organizations producing systematic reviews, health technology assessments, as well as clinical and public health practice guidelines – including some of the world's most prestigious health organizations (e.g., World Health Organization, Cochrane Collaboration, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence). The certainty of bodies of evidence based on observational studies can be rated up if the observed effect is large (<0.5 or >2.0), or if there is a credible dose-response relationship, as reported for observational studies of trans-fatty acid and coronary heart disease risk [16]. While applying GRADE standards to assess short-term low carbohydrate and Mediterranean dietary patterns to reduce weight and blood pressure (surrogate outcomes) reveals moderate certainty evidence based on a systematic review of randomized trials [25], when evaluating the health effects of red meat consumption and the risk of major cardiovascular events, based on systematic reviews of randomized trials and observational studies we have concluded that the evidence is of low to very low certainty and thus of limited trustworthiness [6,7,10].