An introduction to a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews/meta-analysis: AMSTAR

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Volumn 11, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 1084-1089

  Xiong, Jun ^a   Chen, Ri Xin ^b  

^a University of Traditional Chinese Medicine   (China)

^b GUANGZHOU UNIVERSITY OF CHINESE MEDICINE   (China)

Author keywords

AMSTAR; Evidence based medicine; Meta analysis; Methodology; Quality assessment; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT; ANALYTICAL, DIAGNOSTIC AND THERAPEUTIC TECHNIQUES, EQUIPMENT AND PARAMETERS; ASSESSMENT OF MULTIPLE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); QUALITY CONTROL; RELIABILITY; RESPONSIBILITY; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); VALIDITY;

EID: 80053449906     PISSN: 16722531     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Chinese source, 2008, 8(9): 742-743
2. Porta M. Chief editor. A dictionary of epidemiology. Fifth Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008: 217
3. Chinese source, 2009, 9(9): 942-945
4. Chinese source, 2009: 298-299
5. Chinese source, 2007, 21(4): 306-310
6. Moher D, Soeken K, Sampson M, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of systematic reviews in pediatric complementary and alternative medicine. BMC Pediatr, 2002, 2(2): 1-3
7. Jadad A, Moher M, Browman G, et al. Systematic reviews and metaanalyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation. BMJ, 2000, 321(7256): 537-540
8. Jadad AR, Cook DJ, Jones A. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analysis: a comparison of Cochrane paper-based journals. JAMA, 1998, 280(3): 278-280
9. Shea B, Dubé C, Moher D. Assessing the quality of reports of sys tematic reviews: the QUOROM statement compared to other tools. In: Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in context. Edited by: Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG. London: BMJ books, 2001: 122-139
10. Oxman AD. Checklists for review articles. BMJ, 1994, 309(6955): 648-651
11. Sacks H, Berrier J, Reitman D, et al. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med, 1987, 316(8): 450-455
12. Moher D. Cook DJ. Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet, 1999; 354(9193): 1896-1900
13. Chinese source, 2008, 6(4): 337-339
14. Sterne JAC, Gavaghan D, Egger M. Publication and related bias in meta-analysis power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2000, 53(11): 1119-1129
15. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR: A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2007, 7(10): 1-10. e7-8
16. The Cochrane Library. Volume 3. Chichester, UK: John Wiley &Sons Ltd; 2004
17. Egger M, Zellweger-Zahner T, Schneider M, et al. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet, 1997, 351(9095): 326-329
18. Moher D, Pham B, Klassen T, et al. What contributions do languages other than English make to the results of meta-analyses? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2000, 53(9): 964-972
19. Shea BJ, Bouter LM, Peterson J, et al. External Validation of a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). PLoS ONE, 2007, 2(12): 1-4. e1350
20. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Available at: http://www.cadth.ca
21. Becker LA, Oxman AD. Chapter 22: Overviews of reviews. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1 [updated September 2008] The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. Available at: www.cochranehandbook.org
22. Singh JA, Christensen R, Wells GA, et al. Biologics for rheumatoid arthritis: an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2009, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD007848
23. Miktona C, Butchart A. Child maltreatment prevention: a systematic review of reviews. Bull World Health Organ, 2009, 87(5): 353-361
24. Panesar SS, Rao C, Joshua A. et al. Development of the Veritas plot and its application in cardiac surgery: an evidence-synthesis graphic tool for the clinician to assess multiple meta-analyses reporting on a common outcome. Can J Surg, 2009, 52(5): 137-142
25. Sakzewski L, Ziviani J, Boyd R. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Therapeutic Management of Upper-Limb Dysfunction in Children With Congenital Hemiplegia. Pediatrics, 2009, 123(4): 1111-1122
26. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Stratford PW, et al. Evaluation of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of health status measurement instruments. Quality of Life Research, 2009, 18(3): 313-333
27. Bessa-Nogueira RV, Vasconcelos CE, Niederman R. The methodological quality of systematic reviews comparing temporomandibular joint disorder surgical and non-surgical treatment. BMC Oral Health, 2008, 8(10): 27
28. Cornell JE, Laine C. The Science and Art of Deduction: Complex Systematic Overviews. Ann Intern Med, 2008, 148(10): 786-782
29. HTA final report: Electrical Nerve Stimlation for Treatment of Pain. Octo.7, 2009. Available at: http://www.hta.hca.wa.gov
30. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med, 2007, 4(3): 78
31. Moher D, Liberat A, Tetzlaff J, Chinese source, 2009, 7(9): 889-896