Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Dec 14.
Published in final edited form as: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2013 Dec;111(6):465–507. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2013.09.018
Statement Definition Implication
Strong
  recommendation
A strong recommendation means the benefits of the recommended
  approach clearly exceed the harms (or that the harms clearly exceed
  the benefits in the case of a strong negative recommendation) and that
  the quality of the supporting evidence is excellent (grade A or B). In some
  clearly identified circumstances, strong recommendations may be made based
  on lesser evidence when high-quality evidence is impossible to obtain and the
  anticipated benefits strongly outweigh the harms.
Clinicians should follow a strong recommendation
  unless a clear and compelling rationale for an
  alternative approach is present.
Moderate
  recommendation
A moderate recommendation means the benefits exceed the harms (or that the
  harms clearly exceed the benefits in the case of a negative recommendation),
  but the quality of evidence is not as strong (grade B or C). In some clearly identified
  circumstances, recommendations may be made based on lesser evidence when
  high-quality evidence is impossible to obtain and the anticipated benefits outweigh
  the harms.
Clinicians also should generally follow a moderate
  recommendation but should remain alert to new
  information and sensitive to patient values and
  preferences.
Weak
  recommendation
A weak recommendation means that the quality of evidence that exists is suspect
  (grade D) or that well-done studies (grade A, B, or C) show little clear advantage
  to one approach vs another.
Clinicians should be flexible in their decision
  making regarding appropriate practice, although
  they may set bounds on alternatives; patient values
  and preferences should have a substantial influencing role.
No recommendation No recommendation means there is a lack of pertinent evidence (grade D) and an
  unclear balance between benefits and harms.
Clinicians should feel little constraint in their decision
  making and be alert to new published evidence that
  clarifies the balance of benefit vs harm; patient
  preferences and values should have a substantial
  influencing role.