14/06/2024, 15:14 AMSTAR - Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews
You are viewing as a
guest Login
About Contact
Home Publications Checklist FAQs
Us Us
AMSTAR 2 Results
Printer Friendly Version
Article Name:
Test
You are currently logged on as Guest. You need to be logged on as a
member to submit your score.
Log On
Test is a Critially Low quality review
1. Did the research questions and inclusion criteria for Yes
the review include the components of PICO?
2. Did the report of the review contain an explicit Partial Yes
statement that the review methods were established
prior to the conduct of the review and did the report
justify any significant deviations from the protocol?
3. Did the review authors explain their selection of the No
study designs for inclusion in the review?
4. Did the review authors use a comprehensive Yes
literature search strategy?
[Link] 1/3
14/06/2024, 15:14 AMSTAR - Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews
5. Did the review authors perform study selection in Yes
duplicate?
6. Did the review authors perform data extraction in No
duplicate?
7. Did the review authors provide a list of excluded Yes
studies and justify the exclusions?
8. Did the review authors describe the included Partial Yes
studies in adequate detail?
9. Did the review authors use a satisfactory technique
for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual
studies that were included in the review?
RCT Yes
NRSI
10. Did the review authors report on the sources of No
funding for the studies included in the review?
11. If meta-analysis was performed did the review
authors use appropriate methods for statistical
combination of results?
RCT No
NRSI
12. If meta-analysis was performed, did the review Yes
authors assess the potential impact of RoB in
individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis
or other evidence synthesis?
[Link] 2/3
14/06/2024, 15:14 AMSTAR - Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews
13. Did the review authors account for RoB in No
individual studies when interpreting/ discussing the
results of the review?
14. Did the review authors provide a satisfactory Yes
explanation for, and discussion of, any heterogeneity
observed in the results of the review?
15. If they performed quantitative synthesis did the Yes
review authors carry out an adequate investigation of
publication bias (small study bias) and discuss its
likely impact on the results of the review?
16. Did the review authors report any potential Yes
sources of conflict of interest, including any funding
they received for conducting the review?
To cite this tool: Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J,
Moher D, Tugwell P, Welch V, Kristjansson E, Henry DA. AMSTAR 2: a critical
appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-
randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. 2017 Sep
21;358:j4008.
<< Back
Copyright © 2021 AMSTAR All Rights Reserved |
[Link] 3/3