Skip to main content

Table 1 GRADE Assessment

From: Comparative efficacy of pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments for chronic idiopathic constipation in China: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Outcomes Certainty on the evidence Classification Intervention SUCRA GRADE assessment
Primary outcome High Certainty
(High to Moderate quality evidence)
None
Moderate Certainty
(High to Low or Moderate to Low quality evidence)
Group 1
Amongst the best interventions
None
Group 2
Inferior to the best interventions
PB + MP 79% Moderate to Low
PP 70% High to Low
EA 68% High to Low
Low Certainty
(High to Very low or Moderate to Very low or Low to Very low quality evidence)
Group 1
Amongst the best interventions
None
Group 2
Inferior to the best interventions
IF+PP 72% Moderate to Very low
CHD 70% Low to Very low
MP + CHD 68% Low to Very low
Spontaneous bowel movements count High Certainty
(High to Moderate quality evidence)
None
Moderate Certainty
(High to Low or Moderate to Low quality evidence)
Group 1
Amongst the best interventions
CSBS 90% High to Low
RT 81% High to Low
Group 2
Inferior to the best interventions
None
Low Certainty
(High to Very low or Moderate to Very low or Low to Very low quality evidence)
Group 1
Amongst the best interventions
CHD 80% Moderate to Very low
Group 2
Inferior to the best interventions
SL 69% High to Very low
LT + PB 69% Low to Very low
Bristol score High Certainty
(High to Moderate quality evidence)
Group 1
Amongst the best interventions
None
Group 2
Inferior to the best interventions
PEG 78% High to Moderate
Moderate Certainty
(High to Low or Moderate to Low quality evidence)
Group 1
Amongst the best interventions
LT + PB 80% Moderate to Low
Group 2
Inferior to the best interventions
None
Low Certainty
(High to Very low or Moderate to Very low or Low to Very low quality evidence)
Group 1
Amongst the best interventions
None
Group 2
Inferior to the best interventions
ACE 77% High to Very low
CHD 70% High to Very low