The Endocrine Society's guildelines and WPATH's guidelines are the most cited and beloved by most activist groups.
Both of them also use GRADE.
The Endocrine Society's clearly indicate the strength of evidence for each of their guidelines and nearly all of them are listed as "very low quality evidence" or "low quality evidence". In the evidence sections they often clearly mention and discuss the studied that support their findings
WPATH is a lot less transparent in their evaluations. They say that anything listed as "we recommend" has high quality evidence and nearly all of their statements are "we recommend". Most of the time things are just mentioned and then they list various citations, without any actual discussion of the specific study. Nevertheless, they say they are evaluating them an adapted GRADE approach.
Neither of them spend much time justifying their use of GRADE.
I have never seen either of these criticized for using GRADE. It is only when the Cass review also uses GRADE, but has conclusions different than those that someone already agreed with is it called into question. This is clearly motivated reasoning and tendentious.
p
The Endocrine Society's guildelines and WPATH's guidelines are the most cited and beloved by most activist groups.
Both of them also use GRADE.
The Endocrine Society's clearly indicate the strength of evidence for each of their guidelines and nearly all of them are listed as "very low quality evidence" or "low quality evidence". In the evidence sections they often clearly mention and discuss the studied that support their findings
WPATH is a lot less transparent in their evaluations. They say that anything listed as "we recommend" has high quality evidence and nearly all of their statements are "we recommend". Most of the time things are just mentioned and then they list various citations, without any actual discussion of the specific study. Nevertheless, they say they are evaluating them an adapted GRADE approach.
Neither of them spend much time justifying their use of GRADE.
I have never seen either of these criticized for using GRADE. It is only when the Cass review also uses GRADE, but has conclusions different than those that someone already agreed with is it called into question. This is clearly motivated reasoning and tendentious.
More options
Context Copy link