From 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.
From 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.
复制标题
DOI：
10.2174/1874210601004020084
复制
发表时间：
2010-07-16
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Maida CA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kung J;Chiappelli F;Cajulis OO;Avezova R;Kossan G;Chew L;Maida CA
研究综合旨在系统地收集、检查和评估研究报告，这些报告旨在回答精心设计的研究问题，其中说明有问题的患者群体、正在考虑的干预措施以及感兴趣的临床结果。系统地回顾与所提出的研究问题相关的研究文献的过程的产物是“系统回顾”。系统评价的客观和透明方法旨在最大限度地减少偏见。大多数系统评价都会对可测量数据进行定量分析（例如可接受的抽样分析、荟萃分析）。系统审查也可以是定性的，同时遵守收集、评估和报告证据的公认标准。系统评价为循证医疗保健提供高度评价的建议；但是，系统评价在减少偏见方面并不同样可靠和成功。有多种工具可用于评估系统评价的质量。 “多重系统评价的评估”（AMSTAR）源自对其中最相关的项目的因子分析。 AMSTAR由11个项目组成，用于衡量系统评价的方法学质量，具有良好的表面效度和内容效度，已被广泛接受和使用，并在可靠性、再现性方面取得了进展。 AMSTAR 不会对系统评价质量和临床相关性进行量化评估。 在本研究中，我们修订了 AMSTAR 工具，不影响其内容和结构有效性，并利用原始工具开发中采用的标准，旨在产生一种可以量化系统评价质量的工具。我们提供修订后的 AMSTAR (R-AMSTAR) 的验证数据，并讨论其在循证医疗保健中的影响和应用。
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 thusly stated is the “systematic review”. The objective and transparent approach of the systematic review aims to minimize bias. Most systematic reviews yield quantitative analyses of measurable data (e.g., acceptable sampling analysis, meta-analysis). Systematic reviews may also be qualitative, while adhering to accepted standards for gathering, evaluating, and reporting evidence. Systematic reviews provide highly rated recommendations for evidence-based health care; but, systematic reviews are not equally reliable and successful in minimizing bias. Several instruments are available to evaluate the quality of systematic reviews. The 'assessment of multiple systematic reviews' (AMSTAR) was derived from factor analysis of the most relevant items among them. AMSTAR consists of eleven items with good face and content validity for measuring the methodological quality of systematic reviews, has been widely accepted and utilized, and has gained in reliability, reproducibility. AMSTAR does not produce quantifiable assessments of systematic review quality and clinical relevance. In this study, we have revised the AMSTAR instrument, detracting nothing from its content and construct validity, and utilizing the very criteria employed in the development of the original tool, with the aim of yielding an instrument that can quantify the quality of systematic reviews. We present validation data of the revised AMSTAR (R-AMSTAR), and discuss its implications and application in evidence-based health care.