系统回顾
心理干预
批判性评价
观察研究
医学
医疗保健
随机对照试验
替代医学
梅德林
护理部
病理
政治学
经济增长
经济
法学
作者
Beverley Shea,Barnaby C Reeves,George A. Wells,Micere Thuku,Candyce Hamel,Julian Moran,David Moher,Peter Tugwell,Vivian Welch,Elizabeth Kristjansson,David Henry
出处
期刊:BMJ
[BMJ]
日期:2017-09-21
卷期号:: j4008-j4008
被引量:4606
摘要
The number of published systematic reviews of studies of healthcare interventions has increased rapidly and these are used extensively for clinical and policy decisions. Systematic reviews are subject to a range of biases and increasingly include non-randomised studies of interventions. It is important that users can distinguish high quality reviews. Many instruments have been designed to evaluate different aspects of reviews, but there are few comprehensive critical appraisal instruments. AMSTAR was developed to evaluate systematic reviews of randomised trials. In this paper, we report on the updating of AMSTAR and its adaptation to enable more detailed assessment of systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. With moves to base more decisions on real world observational evidence we believe that AMSTAR 2 will assist decision makers in the identification of high quality systematic reviews, including those based on non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI