Systematic reviews explained: AMSTAR-how to tell the good from the bad and the ugly.
نویسندگان
چکیده
Systematic reviews are essential in summarising evidence and providing an indication of its strength and direction. This is why they often inform clinical decision making. Although the quantity of reviews published is increasing, concerns about their quality may sometimes be questioned. This paper highlights the aspects of systematic review methodology that influence a review's overall quality. The authors explain the recently developed tool "Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR) to demonstrate how this can be used efficiently, allowing a busy clinician to evaluate quality and decide whether or not a particular review should be used to inform their clinical practice. Systematic reviews may allow clinicians to incorporate the best available evidence into clinical practice. The ability to evaluate the quality and reliability of systematic reviews is imperative in this process. The authors have used items detailed in AMSTAR to demonstrate the aspects of systematic review methodology that influence the overall quality of a review.
منابع مشابه
Good, bad and ugly: Exploring the Machiavellian power dynamics of leadership in medical education
Introduction: Medical education requires participation of variousstakeholders and this contributes to power dynamics operating atmultiple levels. Personality traits of an individual can affect thesmooth execution of the educational programmes and eventuallythe professionalism of the environment. With the increased focuson leadership traits in medical education and collaboration inhealth care se...
متن کاملCompetition in Healthcare: Good, Bad or Ugly?
The role of competition in healthcare is much debated. Despite a wealth of international experience in relation to competition, evidence is mixed and contested and the debate about the potential role for competition is often polarised. This paper considers briefly some of the reasons for this, focusing on what is meant by “competition in healthcare” and why it is more valuable to think about th...
متن کاملOptimisation of Healthcare Contracts: Tensions Between Standardisation and Innovation; Comment on “Competition in Healthcare: Good, Bad or Ugly?”
An important determinant of health system performance is contracting. Providers often respond to financial incentives, despite the ethical underpinnings of medicine, and payers can craft contracts to influence performance. Yet contracting is highly imperfect in both single-payer and multi-payer health systems. Arguably, in a competitive, multi-payer environment, contractual innovation may occur...
متن کاملA 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 کاملFrom Systematic Reviews to Clinical Recommendations for Evidence-Based Health Care: Validation of Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (R-AMSTAR) for Grading of Clinical Relevance
Research synthesis seeks to gather, examine and evaluate systematically research reports that converge toward answering a carefully crafted research question, which states the problem patient population, the intervention under consideration, and the clinical outcome of interest. The product of the process of systematically reviewing the research literature pertinent to the research question thu...
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:
- Oral health and dental management
دوره 12 1 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2013