Table 4 Grading systems used to determine the level of evidence and the strength of the recommendation
CPG | Â | Name of grading system | Level of evidence grading | Strength of recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | ASIPP [41] | United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria | Good Fair Poor | None |
2 | ICSI [31] | In transition between ISCI system to GRADE. Thus, using an hybrid system | High quality evidence Low quality evidence | None |
3 | NOUGG [42] | – | I, II-1 II-2 II-3 OR III | A, B, C |
4 | RNAO [32] | Adapted SIGN | Ia Ib IIa IIb III IV | None |
5 | SIGN [30] | SIGN | 1++, 1+ 2++; 2+; 2- 3 4 | A, B, C, D, Good practice point |
6 | UMHS [43] | – | A B C D | I II III |
7 | WSAMDG [44] | Rating scheme (not provided) | Not provided | None |
8 | APS AAP [45] | Adapted GRADE methodology. | High quality evidence Medium quality evidence Low quality evidence | Strong recommendation Weak recommendation |
9 | Modified Canadian Task Force Grading System | I, II-1 II-2 II-3 OR III | A, B, C | |
10 | Raff [48] | – | None | None |
11 | Sanders [33] | – | None | None |
12 | Schnitzer [7] | – | None | None |