Systematic review found AMSTAR, but not R(evised)-AMSTAR, to have good measurement properties

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 68, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 574-583

  Pieper, Dawid ^a   Buechter, Roland Brian ^b   Li, Lun ^c   Prediger, Barbara ^a   Eikermann, Michaela ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WITTEN HERDECKE   (Germany)

^b INSTITUTE FOR QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY IN HEALTH CARE IQWIG   (Germany)

^c LANZHOU UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Clinimetrics; Epidemiologic methods; Measurement properties; Observer variation; Psychometrics; Reliability and validity; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

DATA EXTRACTION; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; FEASIBILITY STUDY; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; VALIDATION STUDY; VALIDITY; LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS;

REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84928294465     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.12.009     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. A.D. Oxman, and G.H. Guyatt Validation of an index of the quality of review articles J Clin Epidemiol 44 1991 1271 1278
2. A.D. Oxman, G.H. Guyatt, J. Singer, C.H. Goldsmith, B.G. Hutchison, and R.A. Milner Agreement among reviewers of review articles J Clin Epidemiol 44 1991 91 98
3. B.J. Shea, L.M. Bouter, J. Peterson, M. Boers, N. Andersson, and Z. Ortiz External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) PLoS One 2 12 2007 e1350
4. B.J. Shea, J.M. Grimshaw, G.A. Wells, M. Boers, N. Andersson, and C. Hamel Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews BMC Med Res Methodol 7 2007 10
5. B.J. Shea, C. Hamel, G.A. Wells, L.M. Bouter, E. Kristjansson, and J. Grimshaw AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews J Clin Epidemiol 62 2009 1013 1020
6. L. Hartling, A. Chisholm, D. Thomson, and D.M. Dryden A descriptive analysis of overviews of reviews published between 2000 and 2011 PLoS One 7 11 2012 e49667
7. D. Pieper, R. Buechter, P. Jerinic, and M. Eikermann Overviews of reviews often have limited rigor: a systematic review J Clin Epidemiol 65 2012 1267 1273
8. H.S. Sacks, J. Berrier, D. Reitman, V.A. Ancona-Berk, and T.C. Chalmers Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials N Engl J Med 316 8 1987 450 455
9. National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools AMSTAR: assessing methodological quality of systematic reviews 2011 McMaster University Hamilton, ON Available at http://www.nccmt.ca/registry/view/eng/97.html Accessed June 2014
10. J. Kung, F. Chiappelli, O.O. Cajulis, R. Avezova, G. Kossan, and L. Chew From systematic reviews to clinical recommendations for evidence-based health care: validation of revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR) for grading of clinical relevance Open Dent J 4 2010 84 91
11. L.B. Mokkink, C.B. Terwee, D.L. Patrick, J. Alonso, P.W. Stratford, and D.L. Knol The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study Qual Life Res 19 2010 539 549
12. H.C. De Vet, C.B. Terwee, L.B. Mokkink, and D.L. Knol Measurement in medicine 2011 Cambridge University Press Cambridge
13. R. Fitzpatrick, C. Davey, M.J. Buxton, and D.R. Jones Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials Health Technol Assess 2 1998 1 74 i-iv
14. C.B. Terwee, L.B. Mokkink, D.L. Knol, R.W. Ostelo, L.M. Bouter, and H.C. de Vet Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist Qual Life Res 21 2012 651 657
15. C.M. Faggion Jr., and M. Schmitter Using the best available evidence to support clinical decisions in implant dentistry Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 25 5 2010 960 969
16. D. Hu, D.Y. Kang, and Y.X. Wu Methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews correlated to traditional Chinese medicine published in China Zhongguo Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Za Zhi 31 3 2011 402 406 Chin J integrated traditional West Med/Zhongguo Zhong Xi Yi jie he Xue hui, Zhongguo Zhong Yi Yan jiu yuan zhu ban
17. D. Kang, Y. Wu, D. Hu, Q. Hong, J. Wang, and X. Zhang Reliability and external validity of AMSTAR in assessing quality of TCM systematic reviews Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2012 2012 732195
18. A.C. Melchiors, C.J. Correr, R. Venson, and R. Pontarolo An analysis of quality of systematic reviews on pharmacist health interventions Int J Clin Pharm 34 1 2012 32 42
19. A.M. Passon, A. Drabik, and P.T. Sawicki Quality scores do not predict discrepant statistical significances among meta-analyses on different targets of glycemic control in type 2 diabetes J Clin Epidemiol 66 2013 1356 1366
20. I. Popovich, B. Windsor, V. Jordan, M. Showell, B. Shea, and C.M. Farquhar Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of two different approaches PLoS One 7 12 2012 e50403
21. M. Schmitter, G. Sterzenbach, C.M. Faggion Jr., and G. Krastl A flood tide of systematic reviews on endodontic posts: methodological assessment using of R-AMSTAR Clin Oral Investig 17 5 2013 1287 1294
22. A.S. Tunis, M.D. McInnes, R. Hanna, and K. Esmail Association of study quality with completeness of reporting: have completeness of reporting and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in major radiology journals changed since publication of the PRISMA statement? Radiology 269 2013 413 426
23. D.L. Weed, M.D. Althuis, and P.J. Mink Quality of reviews on sugar-sweetened beverages and health outcomes: a systematic review Am J Clin Nutr 94 2011 1340 1347
24. N. Su, J. Lu, C. Li, L. Chen, and Z. Shi Assessment of reliability and validity of assessment of multiple systematic reviews in Chinese systematic reviews on stomatology Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 31 1 2013 49 52
25. J.R. Landis, and G.G. Koch The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data Biometrics 33 1977 159 174
26. L. Hartling, M.P. Hamm, A. Milne, B. Vandermeer, P.L. Santaguida, and M. Ansari Testing the risk of bias tool showed low reliability between individual reviewers and across consensus assessments of reviewer pairs J Clin Epidemiol 66 2013 973 981
27. L. Hartling, A. Milne, M.P. Hamm, B. Vandermeer, M. Ansari, and A. Tsertsvadze Testing the Newcastle Ottawa Scale showed low reliability between individual reviewers J Clin Epidemiol 66 2013 982 993
28. L. Hartling, K. Bond, B. Vandermeer, J. Seida, D.M. Dryden, and B.H. Rowe Applying the risk of bias tool in a systematic review of combination long-acting beta-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids for persistent asthma PLoS One 6 2 2011 e17242
29. W. Hollingworth, L.S. Medina, R.E. Lenkinski, D.K. Shibata, B. Bernal, and D. Zurakowski Interrater reliability in assessing quality of diagnostic accuracy studies using the QUADAS tool. A preliminary assessment Acad Radiol 13 2006 803 810
30. M.C. Brouwers, M.E. Kho, G.P. Browman, J.S. Burgers, F. Cluzeau, and G. Feder AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care J Clin Epidemiol 63 2010 1308 1311
31. J. Horton, B. Vandermeer, L. Hartling, L. Tjosvold, T.P. Klassen, and N. Buscemi Systematic review data extraction: cross-sectional study showed that experience did not increase accuracy J Clin Epidemiol 63 2010 289 298
32. A. Liberati, D.G. Altman, J. Tetzlaff, C. Mulrow, P.C. Gotzsche, and J.P. Ioannidis The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration BMJ 339 2009 b2700
33. S.B. Eliasdottir, S.D. Steinthorsdottir, O.S. Indridason, R. Palsson, and V.O. Edvardsson Comparison of aneroid and oscillometric blood pressure measurements in children J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich, Conn) 15 11 2013 776 783
34. E.M. Balk, P.A. Bonis, H. Moskowitz, C.H. Schmid, J.P. Ioannidis, and C. Wang Correlation of quality measures with estimates of treatment effect in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials JAMA 287 2002 2973 2982
35. P. Juni, D.G. Altman, and M. Egger Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials BMJ 323 2001 42 46
36. P. Juni, A. Witschi, R. Bloch, and M. Egger The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis JAMA 282 1999 1054 1060
37. J. Higgins, and S. Green Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration
38. M. Rodgers, A. Sowden, M. Petticrew, L. Arai, H. Roberts, and N. Britten Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: effectiveness of interventions to promote smoke alarm ownership and function Evaluation 15 1 2009 49 73
39. J. McGowan, and P. Tugwell Informative titles described article content J Can Health Libr Assoc 26 3 2005 83 84
40. D. Pieper, T. Mathes, and M. Eikermann Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies? BMC Res Notes 7 2014 609
41. D. Moore Measuring new types of question-order effects: additive and subtractive Public Opin Q 66 1 2002 80 91
42. J.P. Higgins, D.G. Altman, P.C. Gotzsche, P. Juni, D. Moher, and A.D. Oxman The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials BMJ 343 2011 d5928
43. N.N. Available at http://amstar.ca/Amstar-Checklist.php. Accessed April 26, 2013.
44. PEROSH (Partnership for European Research in Occupational Safety and Health). 2014. Available at http://www.perosh.eu/. Accessed August 26, 2014.
45. A. Sygouros, and A. Acar Evidence-based orthodontics: appraisal of the methodologies of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in controversial areas of orthodontics J World Fed Orthodontists 2 3 2013 e117 e122
46. A. Berard, N. Andreu, J. Tetrault, T. Niyonsenga, and D. Myhal Reliability of Chalmers' scale to assess quality in meta-analyses on pharmacological treatments for osteoporosis Ann Epidemiol 10 2000 498 503
47. M. Oremus, C. Oremus, G.B. Hall, M.C. McKinnon Ect, Cognition Systematic Review T Inter-rater and test-retest reliability of quality assessments by novice student raters using the Jadad and Newcastle-Ottawa Scales BMJ Open 2 4 2012