Skip to main content

Table 3 Confidence in review findings – GRADE -CERQual assessment

From: A qualitative evidence synthesis to explore healthcare professionals’ experience of prescribing opioids to adults with chronic non-malignant pain

REVIEW FINDING METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATIONS (NUMBER OF SATISFACTORY STUDIES) RELEVANCE (PARTIAL OR DIRECT) ADEQUACY (NUMBER OF CONCEPTS) COHERENCE* (NUMBER OF STUDIES OUT OF 17) OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF CONFIDENCE
SHOULD I, SHOULDN’T I? ALL 9 DIRECT 19 9 [34–39, 43, 44, 48] HIGH CONFIDENCE
PAIN IS PAIN ALL 5 DIRECT,
1 PARTIAL
8 6 [33, 39, 40, 42, 46, 48] MODERATE CONFIDENCE
WALKING A FINE LINE ALL 9 DIRECT,
1 PARTIAL
16 8 [33, 35, 39–41, 45, 46, 48] MODERATE CONFIDENCE
SOCIAL GUARDIANSHIP ALL 10 DIRECT,
1 PARTIAL
17 11 [33–35, 37–39, 41, 43, 45, 46, 48] HIGH CONFIDENCE
MORAL BOUNDARY WORK ALL 12 DIRECT,
2 PARTIAL
27 14 [33–35, 37–39, 41, 43–49] HIGH CONFIDENCE
REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES ALL 8 DIRECT 18 8 [34, 35, 38, 39, 41, 43, 48, 49] MODERATE CONFIDENCE