How is AMSTAR applied by authors - A call for better reporting

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2018, Pages

  Pieper, Dawid ^a   Koensgen, Nadja ^a   Breuing, Jessica ^a   Ge, Long ^b   Wegewitz, Uta ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WITTEN HERDECKE   (Germany)

^b LANZHOU UNIVERSITY   (China)

^c FEDERAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH   (Germany)

Author keywords

AMSTAR; Methodological study; Quality assessment; Reporting; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

CHECKLIST; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PEER REVIEW; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RESEARCH; STANDARDS;

CHECKLIST; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESEARCH REPORT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85048831470     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-018-0520-z     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Sampson M, Tricco AC, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):e1002028.
2. Pieper D, Buechter R, Jerinic P, Eikermann M. Overviews of reviews often have limited rigor: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65(12):1267-73.
3. Hartling L, Chisholm A, Thomson D, Dryden DM. A descriptive analysis of overviews of reviews published between 2000 and 2011. PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e49667.
4. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44(11):1271-8.
5. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH, Singer J, Goldsmith CH, Hutchison BG, Milner RA, et al. Agreement among reviewers of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44(1):91-8.
6. Sacks HS, Berrier J, Reitman D, Ancona-Berk VA, Chalmers TC. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 1987;316(8):450-5.
7. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2017;358:j4008.
8. Shea BJ, Bouter LM, Peterson J, Boers M, Andersson N, Ortiz Z, et al. External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). PLoS One. 2007;2(12):e1350.
9. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10.
10. Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, Bouter LM, Kristjansson E, Grimshaw J, et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):1013-20.
11. Pieper D, Buechter RB, Li L, Prediger B, Eikermann M. Systematic review found AMSTAR, but not R(evised)-AMSTAR, to have good measurement properties. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(5):574-83.
12. De Vet HC, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL. Measurement in medicine: a practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.
13. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):1006-12.
14. Pollock M, Fernandes RM, Hartling L. Evaluation of AMSTAR to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17(1):48.
15. Pussegoda K, Turner L, Garritty C, Mayhew A, Skidmore B, Stevens A, et al. Identifying approaches for assessing methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews: a descriptive study. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):117.
16. Pussegoda K, Turner L, Garritty C, Mayhew A, Skidmore B, Stevens A, et al. Systematic review adherence to methodological or reporting quality. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):131.
17. Shemilt I, Khan N, Park S, Thomas J. Use of cost-effectiveness analysis to compare the efficiency of study identification methods in systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):140.
18. N.N. AMSTAR 2017 [Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21986647 ].
19. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes. The odds ratio. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2000;320(7247):1468.
20. CADTH - Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Methods for Development 2011 [Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/methods-development.
21. Dowrick AS, Wootten AC, Murphy DG, Costello AJ. "We used a validated questionnaire": what does this mean and is it an accurate statement in urologic research? Urology. 2015;85(6):1304-11.
22. Arevalo-Rodriguez I, Segura O, Sola I, Bonfill X, Sanchez E, Alonso-Coello P. Diagnostic tools for alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias: an overview of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic reviews. BMC Neurol. 2014;14:183.
23. Burda BU, Holmer HK, Norris SL. Limitations of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) and suggestions for improvement. Syst Rev. 2016;5:58.
24. Faggion CM Jr. Critical appraisal of AMSTAR: challenges, limitations, and potential solutions from the perspective of an assessor. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15:63.
25. Wegewitz U, Weikert B, Fishta A, Jacobs A, Pieper D. Resuming the discussion of AMSTAR: what can (should) be made better? BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16(1):111.
26. Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2001;323(7303):42-6.
27. Juni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282(11):1054-60.
28. Sterne JA, Hernan MA, Reeves BC, Savovic J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2016;355:i4919.
29. Whiting P, Savovic J, Higgins JP, Caldwell DM, Reeves BC, Shea B, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;69:225-34.
30. Higgins JP, Sterne JA, Savovic J, Page MJ, Hrobjartsson A, Boutron I, et al. A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;10(Supplement 1)
31. Joyce S, Modini M, Christensen H, Mykletun A, Bryant R, Mitchell PB, et al. Workplace interventions for common mental disorders: a systematic meta-review. Psychol Med. 2016;46(4):683-97.
32. Green S, Higgins JPT. Preparing a Cochrane review. In: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008. p. 11-30.