AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.

By B. Shea, Candyce Hamel, G. Wells, Lex M. Bouter, E. Kristjansson, Jeremy M. Grimshaw, David Henry, M. Boers. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2009

1,735 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ef80de95e466fb61224e700cba1eef37040a7d30

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Risks of all‐cause and suicide mortality in mental disorders: a meta‐review (2014, methodology): “Each review was rated using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) (9), an empirically developed scoring system to assess the quality of systematic reviews, made up of the following eleven criteria scored from 0 to 1: Was an “a priori” design provided?”
Variables Associated With Achievement in Higher Education: A Systematic Review of Meta-Analyses (2017, background): “There are established criteria for how meta-analyses should be conducted and reported (e.g., APA, 2008; Moher, Liberati, Tetzlaff, & Altman, 2009; Shea et al., 2009).”
The prevalence and phenotypic features of polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2016, neutral): “Questions that were answered as ‘yes’ were scored 1 point, whereas all other answers were assigned 0 points, as done previously (Shea et al., 2009).”
Erectile Dysfunction: AUA Guideline (2018, methodology): “625 men who entered a progressive treatment program that used four ICI protocols: (1) papaverine + phentolamine; (2) alprostadil; (3) papaverine +”
Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review for an American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline (2017, methodology): “For each intervention, we selected the most recent, relevant, and comprehensive systematic review that was of the highest quality on the basis of a validated assessment tool (9, 10).”
The effectiveness of computerized order entry at reducing preventable adverse drug events and medication errors in hospital settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2014, methodology): “Methods We adhered to recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement [44,45], including developing the protocol before undertaking the analysis.”
A meta-meta-analysis of the effect of physical activity on depression and anxiety in non-clinical adult populations (2015, methodology): “Quality of the meta-analyses was independently coded by two co-authors (AR and DG) using the 11-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool, which has shown to have good inter-rater agreement, reliability and content validity (Shea et al., 2007, 2009).”
Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews (2015, background): “By pooling statistically signiﬁcant ﬁndings with non-signiﬁcant ﬁndings from all relevant studies included in the review, meta-analyses are able to calculate more precise estimates of the effects”
Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions (2011, positive): “The AMSTAR tool [27], which became available after we started work on our review of reviews, is the only tool that we are aware of that has been validated as a means to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews and could be used in the review of reviews to determine if the potentially ”
Why do singletons conceived after assisted reproduction technology have adverse perinatal outcome? Systematic review and meta-analysis. (2013, methodology): “For systematic reviews and meta-analyses the AMSTAR (Shea et al., 2009) tool was used and for quality of evidence, we used the GRADE system (Guyatt et al.”