[From the evidence to recommendations-how to skillfully justify guideline recommendations]

To justify clinical guideline recommendations comprehensibly is challenging. It is a matter of presenting the quality of the published evidence concerning its certainty and patient relevance, but also additional reasons for the grade of recommendation, as the strength of the recommendation does not only reflect the strength of the evidence. To state this reasoning in a structured manner, an "Evidence to Decision Framework" was developed. In addition to an evaluation of benefits and harms as well as information on certainty of the evidence, the framework comprises further criteria as patient preferences, acceptance of professional stakeholders, feasibility, equity and resources and costs. The most important arguments to justify recommendations in exemplary analyzed urological guidelines are the balance of benefits and harms and the appraisal of the certainty of the underlying evidence; in some cases, patient preferences are addressed. Whether there is an added value in applying further decision criteria for the development and implementation of guidelines remains to be verified. An opportunity of S3 guidelines (evidence- and consensus-based, 6/17 urological guidelines) is that knowledge gaps can be systematically identified, which enables the formulation of relevant research questions, which may contribute to a better basis for future recommendations.