Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Apr 20.
Published in final edited form as: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015 Apr 15;68(Suppl 3):S253–S256. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000000495

Table 3.

Criteria for rating the quality of the body of evidence* by outcome of interest

Rating Description
1= GOOD Evidence includes consistent results from well-designed, well-conducted studies in representative populations that directly assess effects on health outcomes
2= FAIR: Evidence is sufficient to determine effects on health outcomes, but the strength of the evidence is limited by the number, quality, or consistency of the individual studies, generalizability to routine practice, or indirect nature of the evidence on health outcomes.
3= POOR Evidence is based on consensus, usual practice, opinion, or case series. Additionally evidence is insufficient to fully assess the effects on health outcomes because of limited number, or power of studies, important flaws in design or conduct, gaps in the chain of evidence, or lack of information on importance on the key health outcomes
*

Adapted from the US Preventive Services Task Force Procedure Manual7.