Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Authors should clearly report how they derived the overall rating when applying AMSTAR 2—a cross-sectional study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Authors should clearly report how they derived the overall rating when applying AMSTAR 2—a cross-sectional study
Do you wish to request the book?
Authors should clearly report how they derived the overall rating when applying AMSTAR 2—a cross-sectional study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Authors should clearly report how they derived the overall rating when applying AMSTAR 2—a cross-sectional study
2021
Overview
A measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (SRs) 2 (AMSTAR 2) allows for deriving the overall confidence in an SR. We investigated how authors derived the overall confidence rating and whether different schemes lead to different results.
We compared three different schemes (original 7-item scheme, a self-developed 5-item scheme, and the AMSTAR Web site) to derive the overall confidence in AMSTAR 2 using two distinct samples of SRs. Multiple bibliographic databases were searched for articles to analyze how AMSTAR 2 was applied by others.
In both samples (n = 60 and n = 58), the Friedman test revealed a significant difference between the schemes (P < 0.001). The Web site scheme was the least strict one, whereas between the 5-item and 7-item scheme, no differences were found in post hoc analyses. We included 53 publications applying AMSTAR 2 identified in our literature search. Only 37 of them (70%) used the original 7-item scheme. Less than half of them (18 of 37) reported how they derived the overall rating.
Authors should clearly report how they have derived the overall rating when applying AMSTAR 2. Reporting should allow for reproducing the overall ratings for editors, peer reviewers, and readers.
Publisher
Elsevier Inc,Elsevier Limited
