Skip to main content

Table 6 GRADE Summary of findings table - secondary outcomes

From: Communication tools for end-of-life decision-making in the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  1. *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95 % confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95 % CI).
  2. CI confidence interval, RR risk ratio, OR odds ratio, RCT randomized controlled trial, MD mean difference
  3. GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
  4. High quality: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
  5. Moderate quality: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate. The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
  6. Low quality: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited. The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
  7. Very low quality: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate. The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect
  8. Justifications for grading
  9. 1. Study data from single RCT with high risk of bias
  10. 2. Single RCT used cluster randomization, which may have artificially narrowed the confidence interval
  11. 3. Statistically significant heterogeneity; however, between large and small effects rather than between positive and negative effects
  12. 4. Half of studies are cohort studies of poor rather than good quality according to the Newcastle-Ottawa scale
  13. 5. Marked clinical heterogeneity between populations, confirmed with statistical heterogeneity, with inconsistent results crossing the line of no effect
  14. 6. One of the two included trials used cluster randomization, which may have artificially narrowed the confidence interval; the resulting pooled estimate may thus be overly precise despite our statistical adjustment using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs); however, the direction of effect did not change with large or small ICCs as the pooled effect is near the line of no effect
  15. 7. Data reported as median and interquartile range; statistical adjustment needed to obtain mean and standard deviation for pooled results
  16. 8. Type of cost reported in study (fixed, variable or total) varied, limiting precision of estimate
Back to article page

Critical Care

ISSN: 1364-8535