• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

AMSTAR是一种用于评估系统评价方法学质量的可靠且有效的测量工具。

AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.

作者信息

Shea Beverley J, Hamel Candyce, Wells George A, Bouter Lex M, Kristjansson Elizabeth, Grimshaw Jeremy, Henry David A, Boers Maarten

机构信息

Community Information and Epidemiological Technologies (CIET), Institute of Population Health, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1013-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009. Epub 2009 Feb 20.

DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009
PMID:19230606
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to measure the agreement, reliability, construct validity, and feasibility of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We randomly selected 30 systematic reviews from a database. Each was assessed by two reviewers using: (1) the enhanced quality assessment questionnaire (Overview of Quality Assessment Questionnaire [OQAQ]); (2) Sacks' instrument; and (3) our newly developed measurement tool (AMSTAR). We report on reliability (interobserver kappas of the 11 AMSTAR items), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of the sum scores, construct validity (ICCs of the sum scores of AMSTAR compared with those of other instruments), and completion times.

RESULTS

The interrater agreement of the individual items of AMSTAR was substantial with a mean kappa of 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57, 0.83) (range: 0.38-1.0). Kappas recorded for the other instruments were 0.63 (95% CI: 0.38, 0.78) for enhanced OQAQ and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.29, 0.50) for the Sacks' instrument. The ICC of the total score for AMSTAR was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.65, 0.92) compared with 0.91 (95% CI: 0.82, 0.96) for OQAQ and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.94) for the Sacks' instrument. AMSTAR proved easy to apply, each review taking about 15 minutes to complete.

CONCLUSIONS

AMSTAR has good agreement, reliability, construct validity, and feasibility. These findings need confirmation by a broader range of assessors and a more diverse range of reviews.

摘要

目的

我们的目的是评估一种用于评价系统评价的测量工具(AMSTAR)的一致性、可靠性、结构效度和可行性。

研究设计与设置

我们从一个数据库中随机选取了30篇系统评价。由两名评价者使用以下方法对每一篇进行评估:(1)增强质量评估问卷(质量评估问卷概述[OQAQ]);(2)萨克斯工具;以及(3)我们新开发的测量工具(AMSTAR)。我们报告可靠性(AMSTAR 11个条目的观察者间kappa值)、总分的组内相关系数(ICC)、结构效度(将AMSTAR总分的ICC与其他工具的总分ICC进行比较)以及完成时间。

结果

AMSTAR各条目之间的评价者间一致性较高,平均kappa值为0.70(95%置信区间[CI]:0.57,0.83)(范围:0.38 - 1.0)。其他工具的kappa值分别为:增强OQAQ为0.63(95%CI:0.38,0.78),萨克斯工具为0.40(95%CI:0.29,0.50)。AMSTAR总分的ICC为0.84(95%CI:0.65,0.92),而OQAQ为0.91(95%CI:0.82,0.96),萨克斯工具为0.86(95%CI:0.71,0.94)。AMSTAR证明易于应用,每篇评价大约需要15分钟完成。

结论

AMSTAR具有良好的一致性、可靠性、结构效度和可行性。这些发现需要更多评价者和更多样化的评价进行验证。

相似文献

1
AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.AMSTAR是一种用于评估系统评价方法学质量的可靠且有效的测量工具。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1013-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009. Epub 2009 Feb 20.
2
[Assessment of reliability and validity of assessment of multiple systematic reviews in Chinese systematic reviews on stomatology].[口腔医学中文系统评价中多个系统评价评估的可靠性与有效性评估]
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2013 Feb;31(1):49-52.
3
Systematic review found AMSTAR, but not R(evised)-AMSTAR, to have good measurement properties.系统评价发现 AMSTAR 具有良好的测量特性,但 R(修订)-AMSTAR 则不然。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 May;68(5):574-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.12.009. Epub 2014 Dec 30.
4
Reliability and External Validity of AMSTAR in Assessing Quality of TCM Systematic Reviews.AMSTAR 在评价中医系统评价质量中的可靠性和外部有效性。
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2012;2012:732195. doi: 10.1155/2012/732195. Epub 2012 Feb 16.
5
Comparison of methodological quality rating of systematic reviews on neuropathic pain using AMSTAR and R-AMSTAR.使用 AMSTAR 和 R-AMSTAR 比较神经病理性疼痛系统评价方法学质量评分。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 May 8;18(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0493-y.
6
Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.AMSTAR的开发:一种评估系统评价方法学质量的测量工具。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007 Feb 15;7:10. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-10.
7
External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR).用于评估系统评价的测量工具(AMSTAR)的外部验证
PLoS One. 2007 Dec 26;2(12):e1350. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001350.
8
Quality and risk of bias appraisals of systematic reviews are inconsistent across reviewers and centers.系统评价的质量和偏倚评估在评审员和中心之间存在不一致性。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Sep;125:9-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.04.026. Epub 2020 May 19.
9
Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?AMSTAR能否也应用于非随机研究的系统评价?
BMC Res Notes. 2014 Sep 6;7:609. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-609.
10
Evaluation of the reliability, usability, and applicability of AMSTAR, AMSTAR 2, and ROBIS: protocol for a descriptive analytic study.评估 AMSTAR、AMSTAR 2 和 ROBIS 的可靠性、易用性和适用性:描述性分析研究方案。
Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 13;7(1):85. doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0746-1.

引用本文的文献

1
Digital therapeutics for insomnia: an umbrella review and meta-meta-analysis.失眠的数字疗法:一项伞状综述和元元分析
NPJ Digit Med. 2025 Aug 28;8(1):554. doi: 10.1038/s41746-025-01946-y.
2
Cross-Platform Availability of Smartphone Sensors for Depression Indication Systems: Mixed-Methods Umbrella Review.用于抑郁症指示系统的智能手机传感器的跨平台可用性:混合方法综合评价
Interact J Med Res. 2025 Aug 7;14:e69686. doi: 10.2196/69686.
3
Validation of the Quality Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Real-World Studies.
真实世界研究系统评价和Meta分析质量评估工具的验证
J Evid Based Med. 2025 Jun;18(2):e70052. doi: 10.1111/jebm.70052.
4
Quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in dermatology.皮肤病学系统评价和荟萃分析的质量
Cochrane Evid Synth Methods. 2024 May 2;2(5):e12056. doi: 10.1002/cesm.12056. eCollection 2024 May.
5
A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Stroke and Alzheimer's Disease: Therapeutic and Prognostic Implications.中风与阿尔茨海默病关系的Meta分析:治疗及预后意义
Kidney Blood Press Res. 2025;50(1):481-495. doi: 10.1159/000546395. Epub 2025 Jun 5.
6
Platelet-Rich Plasma in Arthroscopic Repair of Full-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears: A Cross-sectional Analysis of Overlapping Meta-analyses.富血小板血浆在关节镜下修复全层肩袖撕裂中的应用:重叠荟萃分析的横断面分析
Orthop J Sports Med. 2025 May 16;13(5):23259671251337481. doi: 10.1177/23259671251337481. eCollection 2025 May.
7
The efficacy, mechanisms and implementation of physical activity as an adjunctive treatment in mental disorders: a meta-review of outcomes, neurobiology and key determinants.体育活动作为精神障碍辅助治疗的疗效、机制及实施:对结果、神经生物学和关键决定因素的元综述
World Psychiatry. 2025 Jun;24(2):227-239. doi: 10.1002/wps.21314.
8
Comparative Efficacy and Precision of Robot-Assisted vs. Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.机器人辅助与传统全膝关节置换术的比较疗效和精度:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
J Clin Med. 2025 May 7;14(9):3249. doi: 10.3390/jcm14093249.
9
Outcomes of rigid fixation compared to wire closure after median sternotomy a systematic review and meta-analysis.正中开胸术后刚性固定与钢丝缝合的效果比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2025 Apr 4;87(5):2948-2962. doi: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000003259. eCollection 2025 May.
10
Incidence and predictors of postoperative delirium following remimazolam administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 29 randomized trials.瑞马唑仑给药后术后谵妄的发生率及预测因素:29项随机试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
BMC Anesthesiol. 2025 Apr 23;25(1):201. doi: 10.1186/s12871-025-03018-w.