External Evidence-Based Guidelines and Other Resources
Evidence-Based Guides for Practice recommendations are largely based on the summarized evidence from the analysis on the Evidence Analysis Library (EAL). The recommendations are rated using the EAL Recommendations Rating Scale and include links to the conclusion statements, evidence summaries and worksheets. At times, the expert workgroup for an EAL project may determine that the EAL may be strengthened and broadened by using external (non-Academy) evidence-based guidelines or other credible resources in developing the recommendations.
External guidelines and other resources can be incorporated into EAL recommendations in 2 ways:
- Credible resources may serve as a reference for a Consensus recommendation
- External guidelines may serve as evidence analysis for Evidence-Based recommendations (either as a replacement for our own evidence analysis or in addition to our own evidence analysis) and receive a strength rating (as long their evidence analysis methodology is considered comparable to that used by the Academy).
When evidence analysis is not available, recommendations based on expert opinion must be supported by one or more credible resources and are rated as Consensus. The References supporting consensus recommendations must be from "credible resources" (e.g., position papers, standards of practice, consensus reports, articles from peer-reviewed journals, other guidelines, nationally recognized documents or websites). This evidence is not graded using the EAL Recommendation Rating Scale.
Recommendations based on content from external guidelines that will be used in the development of EAL guidelines and will be graded using the AGREE II tool in order to uphold the quality of the Academy's guidelines. To be considered for inclusion into the EAL, external guidelines must meet specific methodological criteria. Those guidelines that meet criteria may be incorporated into the guidelines on the EAL and rated by the workgroup, according to the Academy's Recommendation Rating (Strong, Fair, Weak or Insufficient Evidence).
Return to Development of Evidence-Based Nutrition Practice Guidelines