[Construction of a scale to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews].
نویسندگان
چکیده
The aim of this study was to describe the process of creation and validation of methodology to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. From the expansion of the scope and addition of new items to the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) instrument evidence of validity and reliability of the new methodology was sought. Firstly, the original scale was translated, adapted, expanded and evaluated by a panel of five experts. Then it was tested by evaluating a random sample of five systematic reviews by three judges with no formal training in the scale. Finally, the consolidated scale was assessed in a new panel by two judges. The panel of experts reached a consensus regarding the validity of the proposed changes. With respect to the scale total and per item score, the average agreement between judges was considered satisfactory in the consolidated scale. From the processes of adaptation and validation performed, the methodology in its final version consisted of 14 items that taken together indicate the methodological quality of systematic reviews from different areas of knowledge.
منابع مشابه
A Systematic Overview of Reviews on the Efficacy of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Erectile Dysfunction
Background & aim: This systematic overview of reviews on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) was performed to summarize the clinical efficacy of this approach in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) and assess methodological quality of the included reviews. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed to find the systematic reviews and meta-analyses on CAM interventions (e.g., a...
متن کاملSome Notes on Critical Appraisal of Prevalence Studies; Comment on: “The Development of a Critical Appraisal Tool for Use in Systematic Reviews Addressing Questions of Prevalence”
Decisions in healthcare should be based on information obtained according to the principles of Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM). An increasing number of systematic reviews are published which summarize the results of prevalence studies. Interpretation of the results of these reviews should be accompanied by an appraisal of the methodological quality of the included data and studies. The critical a...
متن کاملThe Development of a Critical Appraisal Tool for Use in Systematic Reviews: Addressing Questions of Prevalence
Background Recently there has been a significant increase in the number of systematic reviews addressing questions of prevalence. Key features of a systematic review include the creation of an a priori protocol, clear inclusion criteria, a structured and systematic search process, critical appraisal of studies, and a formal process of data extraction followed by methods to synthesize, or combin...
متن کاملMedical and Surgical Treatment of Reproductive Outcomes in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: An Overview of Systematic Reviews
Background Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common and complex condition affecting up to 18% of reproductive-aged women with reproductive, metabolic and psychological dysfunction. We performed an overview and appraisal of methodological quality of systematic reviews assessing medical and surgical treatments for reproductive outcomes in women with PCOS. Methods This was an overview of syste...
متن کاملClinical antihypertensive efficacy and safety of Iran plants: a systematic review
Background: Antihypertensive plants are one of the means of hypertension control. Objective: To examine the clinical antihypertensive efficacy and safety of the plants found in Iran. Methods: PUBMED, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, EMBASE, SCIENCEDIRECT, PROQUEST, OVID, EBSCO, GOOGLE, and GOOGLE SCHOLAR were searched. The PRISMA guideline was observed. The search terms were Iran, Iranian, plant, herb, antihyp...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- Ciencia & saude coletiva
دوره 20 8 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2015