Kung Jason, Chiappelli Francesco, Cajulis Olivia O, Avezova Raisa, Kossan George, Chew Laura, Maida Carl A
Division of Oral Biology & Medicine, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles CA.
Open Dent J. 2010 Jul 16;4:84-91. doi: 10.2174/1874210601004020084.
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.
研究综合旨在系统地收集、审查和评估那些趋向于回答精心设计的研究问题的研究报告，该问题阐述了问题患者群体、所考虑的干预措施以及感兴趣的临床结果。对如此陈述的研究问题相关的研究文献进行系统综述的过程产物即为“系统综述”。系统综述的客观且透明的方法旨在尽量减少偏倚。大多数系统综述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）。系统综述也可能是定性的，同时遵循收集、评估和报告证据的公认标准。系统综述为循证医疗提供了高度评价的建议；但是，系统综述在尽量减少偏倚方面并非同样可靠和成功。有几种工具可用于评估系统综述的质量。“多个系统综述评估”（AMSTAR）源自对其中最相关项目的因子分析。AMSTAR由11个项目组成，在测量系统综述的方法学质量方面具有良好的表面效度和内容效度，已被广泛接受和使用，并且在可靠性、可重复性方面有所提高。AMSTAR不会对系统综述质量和临床相关性产生可量化的评估。在本研究中，我们对AMSTAR工具进行了修订，在不影响其内容和结构效度的前提下，利用原始工具开发中所采用的标准，旨在产生一种能够量化系统综述质量的工具。我们展示了修订后的AMSTAR（R - AMSTAR）的验证数据，并讨论其在循证医疗中的意义和应用。
