↓ Skip to main content

GRADE: Assessing the quality of evidence in environmental and occupational health

Overview of attention for article published in Environment International, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
199 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
219 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
GRADE: Assessing the quality of evidence in environmental and occupational health
Published in
Environment International, January 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.envint.2016.01.004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca L. Morgan, Kristina A. Thayer, Lisa Bero, Nigel Bruce, Yngve Falck-Ytter, Davina Ghersi, Gordon Guyatt, Carlijn Hooijmans, Miranda Langendam, Daniele Mandrioli, Reem A. Mustafa, Eva A. Rehfuess, Andrew A. Rooney, Beverley Shea, Ellen K. Silbergeld, Patrice Sutton, Mary S. Wolfe, Tracey J. Woodruff, Jos H. Verbeek, Alison C. Holloway, Nancy Santesso, Holger J. Schünemann

Abstract

There is high demand in environmental health for adoption of a structured process that evaluates and integrates evidence while making decisions and recommendations transparent. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework holds promise to address this demand. For over a decade, GRADE has been applied successfully to areas of clinical medicine, public health, and health policy, but experience with GRADE in environmental and occupational health is just beginning. Environmental and occupational health questions focus on understanding whether an exposure is a potential health hazard or risk, assessing the exposure to understand the extent and magnitude of risk, and exploring interventions to mitigate exposure or risk. Although GRADE offers many advantages, including its flexibility and methodological rigor, there are features of the different sources of evidence used in environmental and occupational health that will require further consideration to assess the need for method refinement. An issue that requires particular attention is the evaluation and integration of evidence from human, animal, in vitro, and in silico (computer modeling) studies when determining whether an environmental factor represents a potential health hazard or risk. Assessment of the hazard of exposures can produce analyses for use in the GRADE evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework to inform risk-management decisions about removing harmful exposures or mitigating risks. The EtD framework allows for grading the strength of the recommendations based on judgments of the certainty in the evidence (also known as quality of the evidence), as well as other factors that inform recommendations such as social values and preferences, resource implications, and benefits. GRADE represents an untapped opportunity for environmental and occupational health to make evidence-based recommendations in a systematic and transparent manner. The objectives of this article are to provide an overview of GRADE, discuss GRADE's applicability to environmental health, and identify priority areas for method assessment and development.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Nepal 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 212 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 43 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 16%
Student > Master 21 10%
Student > Bachelor 15 7%
Other 10 5%
Other 39 18%
Unknown 56 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 15%
Environmental Science 25 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 5%
Engineering 9 4%
Other 48 22%
Unknown 74 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,760,428
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Environment International
#1,268
of 5,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,689
of 405,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environment International
#27
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 405,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.