Expert consensus of Chinese Association for the Study of Pain on the radiofrequency therapy technology in the Department of Pain

Table 1 Qualitative modified approach to grading of evidence[46]

Grading	Qualitative	Evidence
Level I	Strong	Evidence obtained from multiple relevant high quality randomized controlled trials for effectiveness
Level II	Moderate	Evidence obtained from at least one relevant high quality randomized controlled trial or multiple relevant moderate or low quality randomized controlled trials
Level III	Fair	Evidence obtained from at least one relevant high quality nonrandomized trial or observational study with multiple moderate or low quality observational studies
Level IV	Limited	Evidence obtained from multiple moderate or low quality relevant observational studies
Level V	Consensus based	Opinion or consensus of large group of clinicians and/or scientists for effectiveness as well as to assess preventive measures, adverse consequences, effectiveness of other measures

Table 2 Guide for strength of recommendations[47]

Strength	Recommendations
Strong	There is high confidence that the recommendation reflects best practice. This is based on: (1) strong evidence for a true net effect (e.g., benefits exceed harms); (2) consistent results, with no or minor exceptions; (3) minor or no concerns about study quality; and/or (4) the extent the panelists’ agreement. Other compelling considerations (discussed in the guideline’s literature review and analyses) may also warrant a strong recommendation.
Moderate	There is moderate confidence that the recommendation reflects best practice. This is based on: (1) good evidence for a true net effect (e.g., benefits exceed harms); (2) consistent results, with minor and/or few exceptions; (3) minor and/or few concerns about study quality; and/or (4) the extent of panelists’ agreement. Other compelling considerations (discussed in the guideline’s literature review and analyses) may also warrant a moderate recommendation.
Weak	There is some confidence that the recommendation offers the best current guidance for practice. This is based on: (1) limited evidence for a true net effect (e.g., benefits exceed harms); (2) consistent results, but with important exceptions; (3) concerns about study quality; and/or (4) the extent of panelists’ agreement. Other considerations (discussed in the guideline’s literature review and analyses) may also warrant a weak recommendation.