Cargando…

Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of an instrument to evaluate systematic reviews of non-randomized studies in epidemiological research. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) is widely used to evaluate the scientific quality of systematic reviews, but it has not been validated for SRs of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pieper, Dawid, Mathes, Tim, Eikermann, Michaela
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4167129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25193554
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-609
_version_ 1782335371018764288
author Pieper, Dawid
Mathes, Tim
Eikermann, Michaela
author_facet Pieper, Dawid
Mathes, Tim
Eikermann, Michaela
author_sort Pieper, Dawid
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is a lack of an instrument to evaluate systematic reviews of non-randomized studies in epidemiological research. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) is widely used to evaluate the scientific quality of systematic reviews, but it has not been validated for SRs of non-randomized studies. The objective of this paper is to report our experience in applying AMSTAR to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies in terms of applicability, reliability and feasibility. Thus, we applied AMSTAR to a recently published review of 32 systematic reviews of non-randomized studies investigating the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery. RESULTS: The inter-rater reliability was high (0.76), albeit items 8 (scientific quality used in formulating conclusions), 9 (appropriate method to combine studies), and 11 (conflicts of interest) scored moderate (≤0.58). However, there was a high heterogeneity between the two pairs of reviewers. In terms of feasibility, AMSTAR proved easy to apply to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies, each review taking 5–10 minutes to complete. We faced problems in applying three items, mainly related to scientific quality of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: AMSTAR showed good psychometric properties, comparable to prior findings in systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials. AMSTAR can be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies, although there are some item specific issues users should be aware of. Revisions and extensions of AMSTAR might be helpful.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4167129
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41671292014-09-19 Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies? Pieper, Dawid Mathes, Tim Eikermann, Michaela BMC Res Notes Research Article BACKGROUND: There is a lack of an instrument to evaluate systematic reviews of non-randomized studies in epidemiological research. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) is widely used to evaluate the scientific quality of systematic reviews, but it has not been validated for SRs of non-randomized studies. The objective of this paper is to report our experience in applying AMSTAR to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies in terms of applicability, reliability and feasibility. Thus, we applied AMSTAR to a recently published review of 32 systematic reviews of non-randomized studies investigating the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery. RESULTS: The inter-rater reliability was high (0.76), albeit items 8 (scientific quality used in formulating conclusions), 9 (appropriate method to combine studies), and 11 (conflicts of interest) scored moderate (≤0.58). However, there was a high heterogeneity between the two pairs of reviewers. In terms of feasibility, AMSTAR proved easy to apply to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies, each review taking 5–10 minutes to complete. We faced problems in applying three items, mainly related to scientific quality of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: AMSTAR showed good psychometric properties, comparable to prior findings in systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials. AMSTAR can be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies, although there are some item specific issues users should be aware of. Revisions and extensions of AMSTAR might be helpful. BioMed Central 2014-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4167129/ /pubmed/25193554 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-609 Text en © Pieper et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pieper, Dawid
Mathes, Tim
Eikermann, Michaela
Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?
title Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?
title_full Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?
title_fullStr Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?
title_full_unstemmed Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?
title_short Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?
title_sort can amstar also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4167129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25193554
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-609
work_keys_str_mv AT pieperdawid canamstaralsobeappliedtosystematicreviewsofnonrandomizedstudies
AT mathestim canamstaralsobeappliedtosystematicreviewsofnonrandomizedstudies
AT eikermannmichaela canamstaralsobeappliedtosystematicreviewsofnonrandomizedstudies