OBJECTIVES: This Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) concept article offers systematic reviewers, guideline authors, and other users of evidence assistance in addressing randomized trial situations in which interventions or comparators differ from those in the target people, interventions, comparators, and outcomes. To clarify what GRADE considers under indirectness of interventions and comparators, we focus on a particular example: when comparator arm participants receive some or all aspects of the intervention management strategy (treatment switching). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: An interdisciplinary panel of the GRADE working group members developed this concept article through an iterative review of examples in multiple teleconferences, small group sessions, and e-mail correspondence. After presentation at a GRADE working group meeting in November 2022, attendees approved the final concept paper, which we support with examples from systematic reviews and individual trials. RESULTS: In the presence of safeguards against risk of bias, trials provide unbiased estimates of the effect of an intervention on the people as enrolled, the interventions as implemented, the comparators as implemented, and the outcomes as measured. Within the GRADE framework, differences in the people, interventions, comparators, and outcomes elements between the review or guideline recommendation targets and the trials as implemented constitute issues of indirectness. The intervention or comparator group management strategy as implemented, when it differs from the target comparator, constitutes one potential source of indirectness: Indirectness of interventions and comparators-comparator group receipt of the intervention constitutes a specific subcategory of said indirectness. The proportion of comparator arm participants that received the intervention and the apparent magnitude of effect bear on whether one should rate down, and if one does, to what extent. CONCLUSION: Treatment switching and other differences between review or guideline recommendation target interventions and comparators vs. interventions and comparators as implemented in otherwise relevant trials are best considered issues of indirectness.

• Klíčová slova
• Applicability, Certainty of evidence, Cross-over, External validity, GRADE, Treatment switching,
• MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• medicína založená na důkazech * MeSH
• randomizované kontrolované studie jako téma * MeSH
• zkreslení výsledků (epidemiologie) * MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This article explores the need for conceptual advances and practical guidance in the application of the GRADE approach within public health contexts. METHODS: We convened an expert workshop and conducted a scoping review to identify challenges experienced by GRADE users in public health contexts. We developed this concept article through thematic analysis and an iterative process of consultation and discussion conducted with members electronically and at three GRADE Working Group meetings. RESULTS: Five priority issues can pose challenges for public health guideline developers and systematic reviewers when applying GRADE: (1) incorporating the perspectives of diverse stakeholders; (2) selecting and prioritizing health and "nonhealth" outcomes; (3) interpreting outcomes and identifying a threshold for decision-making; (4) assessing certainty of evidence from diverse sources, including nonrandomized studies; and (5) addressing implications for decision makers, including concerns about conditional recommendations. We illustrate these challenges with examples from public health guidelines and systematic reviews, identifying gaps where conceptual advances may facilitate the consistent application or further development of the methodology and provide solutions. CONCLUSION: The GRADE Public Health Group will respond to these challenges with solutions that are coherent with existing guidance and can be consistently implemented across public health decision-making contexts.

• Klíčová slova
• GRADE, Guidelines, Health policy, Nonrandomized studies, Public health, Social determinants,
• MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• medicína založená na důkazech MeSH
• směrnice jako téma * MeSH
• systém GRADE metody   MeSH
• systematický přehled jako téma * MeSH
• veřejné zdravotnictví metody   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• konsensus - konference MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH