PRECEPT: An evidence assessment framework for infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control

Thomas Harder, Anja Takla, Tim Eckmanns, Simon Ellis, Frode Forland, Roberta James, Joerg J. Meerpohl, Antony Morgan, Eva Rehfuess, Holger Schünemann, Teun Zuiderent-Jerak, Helena De Carvalho Gomes, Ole Wichmann

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Decisions in public health should be based on the best available evidence, reviewed and appraised using a rigorous and transparent methodology. The Project on a Framework for Rating Evidence in Public Health (PRECEPT) defined a methodology for evaluating and grading evidence in infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control that takes different domains and question types into consideration. The methodology rates evidence in four domains: disease burden, risk factors, diagnostics and intervention. The framework guiding it has four steps going from overarching questions to an evidence statement. In step 1, approaches for identifying relevant key areas and developing specific questions to guide systematic evidence searches are described. In step 2, methodological guidance for conducting systematic reviews is provided; 15 study quality appraisal tools are proposed and an algorithm is given for matching a given study design with a tool. In step 3, a standardised evidence-grading scheme using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methodology is provided, whereby findings are documented in evidence profiles. Step 4 consists of preparing a narrative evidence summary. Users of this framework should be able to evaluate and grade scientific evidence from the four domains in a transparent and reproducible way.

Original languageEnglish
Article number16-00620
JournalEurosurveillance
Volume22
Issue number40
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 5 Oct 2017

Fingerprint

Communicable Diseases
Epidemiology
Public Health

Cite this

Harder, T., Takla, A., Eckmanns, T., Ellis, S., Forland, F., James, R., ... Wichmann, O. (2017). PRECEPT: An evidence assessment framework for infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control. Eurosurveillance, 22(40), [16-00620]. https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.40.16-00620
Harder, Thomas ; Takla, Anja ; Eckmanns, Tim ; Ellis, Simon ; Forland, Frode ; James, Roberta ; Meerpohl, Joerg J. ; Morgan, Antony ; Rehfuess, Eva ; Schünemann, Holger ; Zuiderent-Jerak, Teun ; De Carvalho Gomes, Helena ; Wichmann, Ole. / PRECEPT : An evidence assessment framework for infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control. In: Eurosurveillance. 2017 ; Vol. 22, No. 40.
@article{b630d351d7474df2b7ddef56cbbfa431,
title = "PRECEPT: An evidence assessment framework for infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control",
abstract = "Decisions in public health should be based on the best available evidence, reviewed and appraised using a rigorous and transparent methodology. The Project on a Framework for Rating Evidence in Public Health (PRECEPT) defined a methodology for evaluating and grading evidence in infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control that takes different domains and question types into consideration. The methodology rates evidence in four domains: disease burden, risk factors, diagnostics and intervention. The framework guiding it has four steps going from overarching questions to an evidence statement. In step 1, approaches for identifying relevant key areas and developing specific questions to guide systematic evidence searches are described. In step 2, methodological guidance for conducting systematic reviews is provided; 15 study quality appraisal tools are proposed and an algorithm is given for matching a given study design with a tool. In step 3, a standardised evidence-grading scheme using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methodology is provided, whereby findings are documented in evidence profiles. Step 4 consists of preparing a narrative evidence summary. Users of this framework should be able to evaluate and grade scientific evidence from the four domains in a transparent and reproducible way.",
author = "Thomas Harder and Anja Takla and Tim Eckmanns and Simon Ellis and Frode Forland and Roberta James and Meerpohl, {Joerg J.} and Antony Morgan and Eva Rehfuess and Holger Sch{\"u}nemann and Teun Zuiderent-Jerak and {De Carvalho Gomes}, Helena and Ole Wichmann",
year = "2017",
month = "10",
day = "5",
doi = "10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.40.16-00620",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
journal = "Euro Surveill",
issn = "1025-496X",
publisher = "European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control",
number = "40",

}

Harder, T, Takla, A, Eckmanns, T, Ellis, S, Forland, F, James, R, Meerpohl, JJ, Morgan, A, Rehfuess, E, Schünemann, H, Zuiderent-Jerak, T, De Carvalho Gomes, H & Wichmann, O 2017, 'PRECEPT: An evidence assessment framework for infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control' Eurosurveillance, vol. 22, no. 40, 16-00620. https://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.40.16-00620

PRECEPT : An evidence assessment framework for infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control. / Harder, Thomas; Takla, Anja; Eckmanns, Tim; Ellis, Simon; Forland, Frode; James, Roberta; Meerpohl, Joerg J.; Morgan, Antony; Rehfuess, Eva; Schünemann, Holger; Zuiderent-Jerak, Teun; De Carvalho Gomes, Helena; Wichmann, Ole.

In: Eurosurveillance, Vol. 22, No. 40, 16-00620, 05.10.2017.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - PRECEPT

T2 - An evidence assessment framework for infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control

AU - Harder, Thomas

AU - Takla, Anja

AU - Eckmanns, Tim

AU - Ellis, Simon

AU - Forland, Frode

AU - James, Roberta

AU - Meerpohl, Joerg J.

AU - Morgan, Antony

AU - Rehfuess, Eva

AU - Schünemann, Holger

AU - Zuiderent-Jerak, Teun

AU - De Carvalho Gomes, Helena

AU - Wichmann, Ole

PY - 2017/10/5

Y1 - 2017/10/5

N2 - Decisions in public health should be based on the best available evidence, reviewed and appraised using a rigorous and transparent methodology. The Project on a Framework for Rating Evidence in Public Health (PRECEPT) defined a methodology for evaluating and grading evidence in infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control that takes different domains and question types into consideration. The methodology rates evidence in four domains: disease burden, risk factors, diagnostics and intervention. The framework guiding it has four steps going from overarching questions to an evidence statement. In step 1, approaches for identifying relevant key areas and developing specific questions to guide systematic evidence searches are described. In step 2, methodological guidance for conducting systematic reviews is provided; 15 study quality appraisal tools are proposed and an algorithm is given for matching a given study design with a tool. In step 3, a standardised evidence-grading scheme using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methodology is provided, whereby findings are documented in evidence profiles. Step 4 consists of preparing a narrative evidence summary. Users of this framework should be able to evaluate and grade scientific evidence from the four domains in a transparent and reproducible way.

AB - Decisions in public health should be based on the best available evidence, reviewed and appraised using a rigorous and transparent methodology. The Project on a Framework for Rating Evidence in Public Health (PRECEPT) defined a methodology for evaluating and grading evidence in infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control that takes different domains and question types into consideration. The methodology rates evidence in four domains: disease burden, risk factors, diagnostics and intervention. The framework guiding it has four steps going from overarching questions to an evidence statement. In step 1, approaches for identifying relevant key areas and developing specific questions to guide systematic evidence searches are described. In step 2, methodological guidance for conducting systematic reviews is provided; 15 study quality appraisal tools are proposed and an algorithm is given for matching a given study design with a tool. In step 3, a standardised evidence-grading scheme using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methodology is provided, whereby findings are documented in evidence profiles. Step 4 consists of preparing a narrative evidence summary. Users of this framework should be able to evaluate and grade scientific evidence from the four domains in a transparent and reproducible way.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85031312532&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85031312532&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.40.16-00620

DO - 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.40.16-00620

M3 - Article

VL - 22

JO - Euro Surveill

JF - Euro Surveill

SN - 1025-496X

IS - 40

M1 - 16-00620

ER -