Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Feb 15:7:10.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-10.

Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews

Beverley J Shea  1 , Jeremy M Grimshaw, George A Wells, Maarten Boers, Neil Andersson, Candyce Hamel, Ashley C Porter, Peter Tugwell, David Moher, Lex M Bouter
Affiliations

Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews

Beverley J Shea et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Background: Our objective was to develop an instrument to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews, building upon previous tools, empirical evidence and expert consensus.

Methods: A 37-item assessment tool was formed by combining 1) the enhanced Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire (OQAQ), 2) a checklist created by Sacks, and 3) three additional items recently judged to be of methodological importance. This tool was applied to 99 paper-based and 52 electronic systematic reviews. Exploratory factor analysis was used to identify underlying components. The results were considered by methodological experts using a nominal group technique aimed at item reduction and design of an assessment tool with face and content validity.

Results: The factor analysis identified 11 components. From each component, one item was selected by the nominal group. The resulting instrument was judged to have face and content validity.

Conclusion: A measurement tool for the 'assessment of multiple systematic reviews' (AMSTAR) was developed. The tool consists of 11 items and has good face and content validity for measuring the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Additional studies are needed with a focus on the reproducibility and construct validity of AMSTAR, before strong recommendations can be made on its use.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Davidoff F, Haynes B, Sackett D, Smith R. Evidence-based medicine: a new journal to help doctors identify the information they need. BMJ. 1995;310:1085–6. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lau J, Ioannidis JPA, Schmid CH. Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough. Lancet. 1998;351:123–127. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)08468-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Systematic Review definition http://www.nlm.nih.gov/nichsr/hta101/ta101014.html
    1. Moher D, Soeken K, Sampson M, Campbell K, Ben Perot L, Berman B. Assessing the quality of reports of systematic reviews in pediatric complementary and alternative medicine. BMC Pediatr. 2002;2 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jadad A, Moher M, Browman G, Booker L, Sigouin C, Fuentes M. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation. BMJ. 2000;320:537–540. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7234.537. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources