Rapid strategies recommendations analysis
| Rapid strategies versus ‘Gold Standard’ (n=200) | Kappa | |
| Potentially misleading recommendations | 6.5% (3%–9.9%) | – |
| Inappropriate | 3.5% (0.95%–6%) | – |
| Overconfident | 3% (0.64%–5.3%) | – |
| Reasonable recommendations | 93.5% (90%–96.9%) | – |
| Concordant | 62.5% (55.7%–69.2%) | 0.59 (0.36–0.82) |
| Reasonable disagreement | 31% (24.5%–37.4%) | – |
| Same direction recommendations | 74% (67.5%–79.5%) | – |
| Strong (rapid strategies) (n=26) | 96.1% (82.2%–99.3%) | – |
| Weak (rapid strategies) (n=174) | 70.6% (64.5%–76.9%) | – |
| Potentially misleading quality of evidence judgement | 20% (14.4%–25.5%) | – |
| Inappropriate moderate or high | 5% (1.9%–8%) | – |
| Inappropriate low or very low | 15% (10%–19.9%) | – |
| Quality of evidence agreement | 55.5% (48.6%–62.3%) | 0.59 (0.46–0.72) |
| Coincidence in information use* | 60% (50.4–69.6) | – |
*The same publication/s were used to answer the question.