AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both
Explore this paper's citation graph
Summary
This paper reports on the updating of AMSTAR and its adaptation to enable more detailed assessment of systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both.
- Type
- article
- Published
- 2017-09-21
- Cited by
- 9,594
- References
- 65
- Access
- Open access
- OpenAlex
- https://openalex.org/W2756578555
- Semantic Scholar
- https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:3747442
Keywords
Systematic review, Psychological intervention, Critical appraisal, Observational study, Medicine
References
- Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.
- Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews: The Development of AMSTAR
- The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus.
- Dental Students' Use of AMSTAR to Critically Appraise Systematic Reviews.
- Critical appraisal of AMSTAR: challenges, limitations, and potential solutions from the perspective of an assessor
- Meta-analysis/Shmeta-analysis.
- Routine blood cultures in the management of pyelonephritis in pregnancy for improving outcomes
- What is in a name? Nonfinancial influences on the outcomes of systematic reviews and guidelines.
- Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy
- Meta-analysis in epidemiology, with special reference to studies of the association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer: a critique.
- Reliability of Chalmers' scale to assess quality in meta-analyses on pharmacological treatments for osteoporosis.
- Cardiovascular Risk with Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: Systematic Review of Population-Based Controlled Observational Studies
- External Validation of a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
- Drawing conclusions about causes from systematic reviews of risk factors: The Cambridge Quality Checklists
- The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis.
- Systematic review found AMSTAR, but not R(evised)-AMSTAR, to have good measurement properties.
- Small study effects in meta-analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta-epidemiological study
- AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.
- Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework
- The association between funding by commercial interests and study outcome in randomized controlled drug trials.
Cited by
- Registration in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) of systematic review protocols was associated with increased review quality.
- Systematic overview and critical appraisal of meta‐analyses of interventions in intensive care medicine
- Should a systematic review be tested for reproducibility before its publication?
- Effects of aromatherapy on sleep quality in patients: Protocol for an umbrella review
- Introduction to systematic reviews and meta‐analysis
- High-dose opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews.
- Non-surgical therapies for Peyronie's disease.
- Liposuction for lymphedema
- Recommendations for assessing the risk of bias in systematic reviews of health-care interventions.
- From the Office of a Systematic Review Consultant
- Assessing how information is packaged in rapid reviews for policy-makers and other stakeholders: a cross-sectional study
- Commentary: Renewed controversy over cardiovascular risk with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
- Quality assessment versus risk of bias in systematic reviews: AMSTAR and ROBIS had similar reliability but differed in their construct and applicability.
- Quality assessment of systematic reviews on total hip or knee arthroplasty using mod-AMSTAR
- Apneic oxygenation provides incremental benefit during intubation of patients in the emergency medicine and critical care settings.
- A systematic assessment of Cochrane reviews and systematic reviews published in high-impact medical journals related to cancer
- Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis in Rhinosinusitis: a Critical Review of the Reviews
- There is moderate evidence for the effectiveness of occupation and activity-based interventions for people with traumatic brain injury although more evidence is needed for interventions provided specifically by occupational therapists.
- Benefits and harms associated with analgesic medications used in the management of acute dental pain: An overview of systematic reviews.
- Appraisal of systematic reviews on the management of peri‐implant diseases with two methodological tools
Related papers
- Observational Studies
- The Effects of Video Observational Training on Video and Live Observational Proficiency
- The Development of a Critical Appraisal Tool for Use in Systematic Reviews: Addressing Questions of Prevalence
- The development of a critical appraisal tool for use in systematic reviews addressing questions of prevalence.
- Critical Appraisal of a Systematic Review: A Concise Review
- Critical Appraisal for Systematic Review: Focused on A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2
- Comparison of search strategies in systematic reviews of adverse effects to other systematic reviews.
- Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews using the AMSTAR tool
- Systematic review: better or (otherwise) misleading for clinical decision?