Welcome to the new OASIS website! We have academic skills, library skills, math and statistics support, and writing resources all together in one new home.

levels of evidence in medical research

  • Walden University
  • Faculty Portal

Evidence-Based Research: Levels of Evidence Pyramid

Introduction.

One way to organize the different types of evidence involved in evidence-based practice research is the levels of evidence pyramid. The pyramid includes a variety of evidence types and levels.

  • systematic reviews
  • critically-appraised topics
  • critically-appraised individual articles
  • randomized controlled trials
  • cohort studies
  • case-controlled studies, case series, and case reports
  • Background information, expert opinion

Levels of evidence pyramid

The levels of evidence pyramid provides a way to visualize both the quality of evidence and the amount of evidence available. For example, systematic reviews are at the top of the pyramid, meaning they are both the highest level of evidence and the least common. As you go down the pyramid, the amount of evidence will increase as the quality of the evidence decreases.

Levels of Evidence Pyramid

Text alternative for Levels of Evidence Pyramid diagram

EBM Pyramid and EBM Page Generator, copyright 2006 Trustees of Dartmouth College and Yale University. All Rights Reserved. Produced by Jan Glover, David Izzo, Karen Odato and Lei Wang.

Filtered Resources

Filtered resources appraise the quality of studies and often make recommendations for practice. The main types of filtered resources in evidence-based practice are:

Scroll down the page to the Systematic reviews , Critically-appraised topics , and Critically-appraised individual articles sections for links to resources where you can find each of these types of filtered information.

Systematic reviews

Authors of a systematic review ask a specific clinical question, perform a comprehensive literature review, eliminate the poorly done studies, and attempt to make practice recommendations based on the well-done studies. Systematic reviews include only experimental, or quantitative, studies, and often include only randomized controlled trials.

You can find systematic reviews in these filtered databases :

  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Cochrane systematic reviews are considered the gold standard for systematic reviews. This database contains both systematic reviews and review protocols. To find only systematic reviews, select Cochrane Reviews in the Document Type box.
  • JBI EBP Database (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database) This database includes systematic reviews, evidence summaries, and best practice information sheets. To find only systematic reviews, click on Limits and then select Systematic Reviews in the Publication Types box. To see how to use the limit and find full text, please see our Joanna Briggs Institute Search Help page .

Open Access databases provide unrestricted access to and use of peer-reviewed and non peer-reviewed journal articles, books, dissertations, and more.

You can also find systematic reviews in this unfiltered database :

Some journals are peer reviewed

To learn more about finding systematic reviews, please see our guide:

  • Filtered Resources: Systematic Reviews

Critically-appraised topics

Authors of critically-appraised topics evaluate and synthesize multiple research studies. Critically-appraised topics are like short systematic reviews focused on a particular topic.

You can find critically-appraised topics in these resources:

  • Annual Reviews This collection offers comprehensive, timely collections of critical reviews written by leading scientists. To find reviews on your topic, use the search box in the upper-right corner.
  • Guideline Central This free database offers quick-reference guideline summaries organized by a new non-profit initiative which will aim to fill the gap left by the sudden closure of AHRQ’s National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC).
  • JBI EBP Database (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database) To find critically-appraised topics in JBI, click on Limits and then select Evidence Summaries from the Publication Types box. To see how to use the limit and find full text, please see our Joanna Briggs Institute Search Help page .
  • National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Evidence-based recommendations for health and care in England.
  • Filtered Resources: Critically-Appraised Topics

Critically-appraised individual articles

Authors of critically-appraised individual articles evaluate and synopsize individual research studies.

You can find critically-appraised individual articles in these resources:

  • EvidenceAlerts Quality articles from over 120 clinical journals are selected by research staff and then rated for clinical relevance and interest by an international group of physicians. Note: You must create a free account to search EvidenceAlerts.
  • ACP Journal Club This journal publishes reviews of research on the care of adults and adolescents. You can either browse this journal or use the Search within this publication feature.
  • Evidence-Based Nursing This journal reviews research studies that are relevant to best nursing practice. You can either browse individual issues or use the search box in the upper-right corner.

To learn more about finding critically-appraised individual articles, please see our guide:

  • Filtered Resources: Critically-Appraised Individual Articles

Unfiltered resources

You may not always be able to find information on your topic in the filtered literature. When this happens, you'll need to search the primary or unfiltered literature. Keep in mind that with unfiltered resources, you take on the role of reviewing what you find to make sure it is valid and reliable.

Note: You can also find systematic reviews and other filtered resources in these unfiltered databases.

The Levels of Evidence Pyramid includes unfiltered study types in this order of evidence from higher to lower:

You can search for each of these types of evidence in the following databases:

TRIP database

Background information & expert opinion.

Background information and expert opinions are not necessarily backed by research studies. They include point-of-care resources, textbooks, conference proceedings, etc.

  • Family Physicians Inquiries Network: Clinical Inquiries Provide the ideal answers to clinical questions using a structured search, critical appraisal, authoritative recommendations, clinical perspective, and rigorous peer review. Clinical Inquiries deliver best evidence for point-of-care use.
  • Harrison, T. R., & Fauci, A. S. (2009). Harrison's Manual of Medicine . New York: McGraw-Hill Professional. Contains the clinical portions of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine .
  • Lippincott manual of nursing practice (8th ed.). (2006). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Provides background information on clinical nursing practice.
  • Medscape: Drugs & Diseases An open-access, point-of-care medical reference that includes clinical information from top physicians and pharmacists in the United States and worldwide.
  • Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository An open-access repository that contains works by nurses and is sponsored by Sigma Theta Tau International, the Honor Society of Nursing. Note: This resource contains both expert opinion and evidence-based practice articles.
  • Previous Page: Phrasing Research Questions
  • Next Page: Evidence Types
  • Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

  • Academic Residencies
  • Academic Skills
  • Career Planning and Development
  • Customer Care Team
  • Field Experience
  • Military Services
  • Student Success Advising
  • Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

  • Center for Social Change
  • Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
  • Office of Degree Acceleration
  • Office of Research and Doctoral Services
  • Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

  • Doctoral Writing Assessment
  • Form & Style Review
  • Quick Answers
  • ScholarWorks
  • SKIL Courses and Workshops
  • Walden Bookstore
  • Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
  • Student Safety/Title IX
  • Legal & Consumer Information
  • Website Terms and Conditions
  • Cookie Policy
  • Accessibility
  • Accreditation
  • State Authorization
  • Net Price Calculator
  • Cost of Attendance
  • Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

  • Evidence-Based Medicine
  • Finding the Evidence
  • eJournals for EBM

Levels of Evidence

  • JAMA Users' Guides
  • Tutorials (Learning EBM)
  • Web Resources

Resources That Rate The Evidence

  • ACP Smart Medicine
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
  • Clinical Evidence
  • Cochrane Library
  • Health Services/Technology Assessment Texts (HSTAT)
  • PDQ® Cancer Information Summaries from NCI
  • Trip Database

Critically Appraised Individual Articles

  • Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • Evidence-Based Dentistry
  • Evidence-Based Nursing
  • Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice

Grades of Recommendation

Critically-appraised individual articles and synopses include:

Filtered evidence:

  • Level I: Evidence from a systematic review of all relevant randomized controlled trials.
  • Level II: Evidence from a meta-analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials.
  • Level III: Evidence from evidence summaries developed from systematic reviews
  • Level IV: Evidence from guidelines developed from systematic reviews
  • Level V: Evidence from meta-syntheses of a group of descriptive or qualitative studies
  • Level VI: Evidence from evidence summaries of individual studies
  • Level VII: Evidence from one properly designed randomized controlled trial

Unfiltered evidence:

  • Level VIII: Evidence from nonrandomized controlled clinical trials, nonrandomized clinical trials, cohort studies, case series, case reports, and individual qualitative studies.
  • Level IX: Evidence from opinion of authorities and/or reports of expert committee

Two things to remember:

1. Studies in which randomization occurs represent a higher level of evidence than those in which subject selection is not random.

2. Controlled studies carry a higher level of evidence than those in which control groups are not used.

Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT)

  • SORT The American Academy of Family Physicians uses the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) to label key recommendations in clinical review articles. In general, only key recommendations are given a Strength-of-Recommendation grade. Grades are assigned on the basis of the quality and consistency of available evidence.
  • << Previous: eJournals for EBM
  • Next: JAMA Users' Guides >>
  • Last Updated: Aug 16, 2024 4:11 PM
  • URL: https://guides.library.stonybrook.edu/evidence-based-medicine
  • Request a Class
  • Hours & Locations
  • Ask a Librarian
  • Special Collections
  • Library Faculty & Staff

Library Administration: 631.632.7100

  • Stony Brook Home
  • Campus Maps
  • Web Accessibility Information
  • Accessibility Barrier Report Form

campaign for stony brook

Comments or Suggestions? | Library Webmaster

Creative Commons License

Except where otherwise noted, this work by SBU Libraries is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License .

Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford

  • Levels of evidence

OCEBM Levels of Evidence

Introduction.

  • Download the Levels of Evidence document  (v2.1, PDF)

NB: the table is intended to be used alongside the  Introductory Document  and  Background Document. Please  do not  read the table separately but rather read the Introductory Document and Table together.

Hierarchies of evidence have been somewhat inflexibly used, and criticised, for some decades. The CEBM “levels of evidence” were first produced in 1998 for  Evidence-Based On Call  to make the process of finding appropriate evidence feasible and its results explicit. We have revised the “levels” in light of new concepts and data, and we would like to hear your  feedback .

There are two different ways to interpret Level 1 evidence for treatment benefits as it is currently stated. The intended interpretation is: “either N-of-1 randomized trials or systematic reviews of randomized trials”. The wrong interpretation is: “either systematic reviews of randomized trials or systematic reviews of n-of-1 trials”.

> Levels of Evidence (2009 and 2011)

Table : results of a PubMed search for “atrial fibrillation AND warfarin” with some filters

(search done Jan 7th 2010)

Full list of Downloads

  • The Levels of Evidence, version 2.1:   English  |  French  –  Nancy Durieux, Francoise Pasleau | Japanese  和訳    –  Mikiko Shigemori | Polish – Albert Stachura  
  • Introductory document:   English  | French
  • Background document:  English  |  French

Citing Levels of Evidence 2

If you intend to cite this table and/or the accompanying text please use one of the following citation examples.

How to cite the Levels of Evidence 2 Table

OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group*. “The Oxford Levels of Evidence 2”. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.  https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/ocebm-levels-of-evidence

* OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group = Jeremy Howick, Iain Chalmers (James Lind Library), Paul Glasziou, Trish Greenhalgh, Carl Heneghan, Alessandro Liberati, Ivan Moschetti, Bob Phillips, Hazel Thornton, Olive Goddard and Mary Hodgkinson

How to cite the Introductory Document

Jeremy Howick, Iain Chalmers, Paul Glasziou, Trish Greenhalgh, Carl Heneghan, Alessandro Liberati, Ivan Moschetti, Bob Phillips, and Hazel Thornton . “The 2011 Oxford CEBM Levels of Evidence (Introductory Document)”. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.  https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/ocebm-levels-of-evidence

How to cite the Background Document

Jeremy Howick, Iain Chalmers, Paul Glasziou, Trish Greenhalgh, Carl Heneghan, Alessandro Liberati, Ivan Moschetti, Bob Phillips, and Hazel Thornton . “Explanation of the 2011 Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) Levels of Evidence (Background Document)”. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.  https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/ocebm-levels-of-evidence

Ball CM, Phillips RS. Evidence-Based On-Call. Churchill Livingstone: Edinburgh, 2001.

Guyatt, G.H., et al., GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 2008. 336(7650): p. 924-6.

The Levels of Evidence, version 2.1:   English  |  French  –  Nancy Durieux, Francoise Pasleau | Japanese  和訳    –  Mikiko Shigemori |  Polish – Albert Stachura

Systematic Reviews

  • Levels of Evidence
  • Evidence Pyramid
  • Joanna Briggs Institute

The evidence pyramid is often used to illustrate the development of evidence. At the base of the pyramid is animal research and laboratory studies – this is where ideas are first developed. As you progress up the pyramid the amount of information available decreases in volume, but increases in relevance to the clinical setting.

Meta Analysis  – systematic review that uses quantitative methods to synthesize and summarize the results.

Systematic Review  – summary of the medical literature that uses explicit methods to perform a comprehensive literature search and critical appraisal of individual studies and that uses appropriate st atistical techniques to combine these valid studies.

Randomized Controlled Trial – Participants are randomly allocated into an experimental group or a control group and followed over time for the variables/outcomes of interest.

Cohort Study – Involves identification of two groups (cohorts) of patients, one which received the exposure of interest, and one which did not, and following these cohorts forward for the outcome of interest.

Case Control Study – study which involves identifying patients who have the outcome of interest (cases) and patients without the same outcome (controls), and looking back to see if they had the exposure of interest.

Case Series   – report on a series of patients with an outcome of interest. No control group is involved.

  • Levels of Evidence from The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine
  • The JBI Model of Evidence Based Healthcare
  • How to Use the Evidence: Assessment and Application of Scientific Evidence From the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia. Book must be downloaded; not available to read online.

When searching for evidence to answer clinical questions, aim to identify the highest level of available evidence. Evidence hierarchies can help you strategically identify which resources to use for finding evidence, as well as which search results are most likely to be "best".                                             

Hierarchy of Evidence. For a text-based version, see text below image.

Image source: Evidence-Based Practice: Study Design from Duke University Medical Center Library & Archives. This work is licensed under a Creativ e Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License .

The hierarchy of evidence (also known as the evidence-based pyramid) is depicted as a triangular representation of the levels of evidence with the strongest evidence at the top which progresses down through evidence with decreasing strength. At the top of the pyramid are research syntheses, such as Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews, the strongest forms of evidence. Below research syntheses are primary research studies progressing from experimental studies, such as Randomized Controlled Trials, to observational studies, such as Cohort Studies, Case-Control Studies, Cross-Sectional Studies, Case Series, and Case Reports. Non-Human Animal Studies and Laboratory Studies occupy the lowest level of evidence at the base of the pyramid.

  • << Previous: What is a Systematic Review?
  • Next: Locating Systematic Reviews >>
  • Getting Started
  • What is a Systematic Review?
  • Locating Systematic Reviews
  • Searching Systematically
  • Developing Answerable Questions
  • Identifying Synonyms & Related Terms
  • Using Truncation and Wildcards
  • Identifying Search Limits/Exclusion Criteria
  • Keyword vs. Subject Searching
  • Where to Search
  • Search Filters
  • Sensitivity vs. Precision
  • Core Databases
  • Other Databases
  • Clinical Trial Registries
  • Conference Presentations
  • Databases Indexing Grey Literature
  • Web Searching
  • Handsearching
  • Citation Indexes
  • Documenting the Search Process
  • Managing your Review

Research Support

  • Last Updated: Sep 25, 2024 3:16 PM
  • URL: https://guides.library.ucdavis.edu/systematic-reviews

IMAGES

  1. Evidence-based medicine pyramid. The levels of evidence are

    levels of evidence in medical research

  2. Levels of evidence by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine

    levels of evidence in medical research

  3. Levels of Evidence

    levels of evidence in medical research

  4. Levels of evidence by the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

    levels of evidence in medical research

  5. Levels of Evidence

    levels of evidence in medical research

  6. Levels of Evidence in Research: Examples, Hierachies & Practice

    levels of evidence in medical research

VIDEO

  1. Understanding 'Levels of Evidence'

  2. Researching: levels of evidence

  3. Levels of Evidence

  4. Levels of Evidence

  5. Evidence-Based Practice, Step 2 (part II): Searching- Levels of Evidence

  6. Clinical Research series

COMMENTS

  1. Levels of Evidence in Medical Research

    The quality of evidence from medical research is partially deemed by the hierarchy of study designs. On the lowest level, the hierarchy of study designs begins with animal and translational studies and expert opinion, and then ascends to descriptive case reports or …

  2. New evidence pyramid

    A pyramid has expressed the idea of hierarchy of medical evidence for so long, that not all evidence is the same. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been placed at the top of this pyramid for several good reasons.

  3. Levels of Evidence Pyramid

    The levels of evidence pyramid provides a way to visualize both the quality of evidence and the amount of evidence available. For example, systematic reviews are at the top of the pyramid, …

  4. Levels of Evidence

    Level I: Evidence from a systematic review of all relevant randomized controlled trials. Level II: Evidence from a meta-analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials. Level …

  5. OCEBM Levels of Evidence

    The CEBM “levels of evidence” were first produced in 1998 for Evidence-Based On Call to make the process of finding appropriate evidence feasible and its results explicit. We have revised …

  6. Research Guides: Systematic Reviews: Levels of Evidence

    When searching for evidence to answer clinical questions, aim to identify the highest level of available evidence. Evidence hierarchies can help you strategically identify …