Evidence Rating | Evaluation Criteria |
Level I |
Evidence from a systematic review or meta-analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), or evidence-based clinical practice guidelines based on systematic reviews of RCTs |
Level II | Evidence obtained from at least one well-designed RCT |
Level III |
Evidence obtained from well-designed controlled trials without randomization |
Level IV | Evidence from well-designed case-control and cohort studies |
Level V | Evidence from systematic reviews of descriptive and qualitative studies |
Level VI | Evidence from a single descriptive or qualitative study |
Level VII | Evidence from the opinion of authorities and/or reports of expert committees |
From: Melnyk, Gallagher-Ford & Fineout-Overholt. Implementing the Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Competencies in Healthcare.
Grade | Nomenclature | Definition for Research Evidence | Definition for Non-Research Evidence |
A | High | Consistent results, sufficient sample size, adequate control, and definitive conclusions; consistent recommendations based on extensive literature review that includes thoughtful reference to scientific evidence | Expertise is clearly evident |
B | Good | Reasonably consistent results, sufficient sample size, some control, and fairly definitive conclusions; reasonably consistent recommendations based on fairly comprehensive literature review that includes some reference to scientific evidence | Expertise appears to be credible |
C | Low/Major Flaw | Little evidence with inconsistent results, insufficient sample size, conclusions cannot be drawn | Expertise is not discernable or is dubious |
From: Dang & Dearholt. Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines, p. 207.
Stimson Library | US Army MEDCoE
BLDG 2840 STE 106 3630 Stanley Road JBSA Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234-6160
Privacy & Security Notice | External Links Disclaimer | Web Accessability