Table 3.

Grading the strength of recommendations

A. The NACB strongly recommends adoption

Strong recommendations for adoption are made when

•There is high-quality evidence and strong or very strong agreement of experts that the intervention improves important health outcomes and that benefits substantially outweigh harms; or

•There is moderate-quality evidence and strong or very strong agreement of experts that the intervention improves important health outcomes and that benefits substantially outweigh harms.

Strong recommendations against adoption are made when

•There is high-quality evidence and strong or very strong agreement of experts that the intervention is ineffective or that benefits are closely balanced with harms, or that harms clearly outweigh benefits; or

•There is moderate-quality evidence and strong or very strong agreement of experts that the intervention is ineffective or that benefits are closely balanced with harms, or that harms outweigh benefits.

B. The NACB recommends adoption

Recommendations for adoption are made when

•There is moderate-quality evidence and level of agreement of experts that the intervention improves important health outcomes and that benefits outweigh harms; or

•There is low-quality evidence but strong or very strong agreement and high level of confidence of experts that the intervention improves important health outcomes and that benefits outweigh harms; or

•There is very low–quality evidence but very strong agreement and very high level of confidence of experts that the intervention improves important health outcomes and that benefits outweigh harms.

Recommendations against adoption are made when

•There is moderate-quality evidence and level of agreement of experts that the intervention is ineffective or that benefits are closely balanced with harms, or that harms outweigh benefits; or

•There is low-quality evidence but strong or very strong agreement and high level of confidence of experts that the intervention is ineffective or that benefits are closely balanced with harms, or that harms outweigh benefits; or

•There is very low–quality evidence but very strong agreement and very high levels of confidence of experts that the intervention is ineffective or that benefits are closely balanced with harms, or that harms outweigh benefits.

C. The NACB concludes that there is insufficient information to make a recommendation

Grade C is applied in the following circumstances:

•Evidence is lacking or scarce or of very low quality, the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined, and there is no or very low level of agreement of experts for or against adoption of the recommendation.

•At any level of evidence—particularly if the evidence is heterogeneous or inconsistent, indirect, or inconclusive—if there is no agreement of experts for or against adoption of the recommendation.

GPP. The NACB recommends it as a good practice point

GPPs are recommendations mostly driven by expert consensus and professional agreement and are based on the information listed below and/or professional experience, or widely accepted standards of best practice. This category applies predominantly to technical (e.g., preanalytical, analytical, postanalytical), organizational, economic, or quality-management aspects of laboratory practice. In these cases, evidence often comes from observational studies, audit reports, case series or case studies, nonsystematic reviews, guidance or technical documents, non–evidence-based guidelines, personal opinions, expert consensus, or position statements. Recommendations are often based on empirical data, usual practice, quality requirements, and standards set by professional or legislative authorities or accreditation bodies, and so forth.