• 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

相似文献

1
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.
2
Minor differences were found between AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS in the assessment of systematic reviews including both randomized and nonrandomized studies.在评估包括随机和非随机研究的系统综述时，AMSTAR 2 与 ROBIS 之间存在细微差异。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Apr;108:26-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.12.004. Epub 2018 Dec 10.
3
Inter-rater reliability of AMSTAR is dependent on the pair of reviewers.AMSTAR的评分者间信度取决于评审者对。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Jul 11;17(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0380-y.
4
Measuring test-retest reliability (TRR) of AMSTAR provides moderate to perfect agreement - a contribution to the discussion of the importance of TRR in relation to the psychometric properties of assessment tools.测量 AMSTAR 的重测信度（TRR）提供了从中等到极好的一致性 - 这有助于讨论 TRR 相对于评估工具的心理测量特性的重要性。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021 Mar 11;21(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01231-y.
5
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.
6
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.
7
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.
8
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.
9
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.
10
Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of two different approaches.系统评价在不孕症中的方法学质量：两种不同方法的比较。
PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e50403. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050403. Epub 2012 Dec 28.

引用本文的文献

1
An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses Evaluating Associations between Human Health and Exposure to Major Classes of Plastic-Associated Chemicals.伞式综述评估了人类健康与接触主要类别的塑料相关化学品之间的关联。
Ann Glob Health. 2024 Aug 19;90(1):52. doi: 10.5334/aogh.4459. eCollection 2024.
2
The association between air pollution and obesity: an umbrella review of meta-analyses and systematic reviews.空气污染与肥胖的关联：荟萃分析和系统评价的伞式综述。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Jul 11;24(1):1856. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-19370-4.
3
Assessing the methodological quality and risk of bias of systematic reviews: primer for authors of overviews of systematic reviews.评估系统评价的方法学质量和偏倚风险：系统评价概述作者指南
BMJ Med. 2024 May 30;3(1):e000604. doi: 10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000604. eCollection 2024.
4
Association between COVID-19 and sexual health: an umbrella review.新型冠状病毒肺炎（COVID-19）与性健康的关联：伞式综述。
Ann Med. 2023;55(2):2258902. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2258902. Epub 2023 Sep 21.
5
Adverse effects associated with acupuncture therapies: An evidence mapping from 535 systematic reviews.针灸疗法的不良反应：来自535篇系统评价的证据图谱
Chin Med. 2023 Apr 10;18(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s13020-023-00743-7.
6
Effect of internal limiting membrane peeling for idiopathic epiretinal membrane.内界膜剥除术治疗特发性视网膜前膜的效果
Heliyon. 2023 Feb 25;9(3):e14079. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14079. eCollection 2023 Mar.
7
Association between dry eye disease and depression: An umbrella review.干眼疾病与抑郁症之间的关联：伞式综述。
Front Public Health. 2022 Nov 17;10:910608. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.910608. eCollection 2022.
8
Adopting AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews: speed of the tool uptake and barriers for its adoption.采用 AMSTAR 2 系统评价评价工具：工具采用的速度及其采用的障碍。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Apr 10;22(1):104. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01592-y.
9
Safety of Cinnamon: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Randomized Clinical Trials.肉桂的安全性：随机临床试验的Meta分析和系统评价的伞状综述
Front Pharmacol. 2022 Jan 18;12:790901. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.790901. eCollection 2021.
10
Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR).使用评估系统评价的测量工具（AMSTAR）评估乳房重建综述。
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2021 Nov 22;9(11):e3897. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000003897. eCollection 2021 Nov.

本文引用的文献

1
An introduction to methodological issues when including non-randomised studies in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions.将非随机研究纳入干预效果系统评价时的方法学问题介绍。
Res Synth Methods. 2013 Mar;4(1):1-11. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1068. Epub 2013 Jan 24.
2
Testing the Newcastle Ottawa Scale showed low reliability between individual reviewers.信度检验表明，个体评审员之间的纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评分可靠性较低。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Sep;66(9):982-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.03.003. Epub 2013 May 16.
3
State of evidence on the relationship between high-volume hospitals and outcomes in surgery: a systematic review of systematic reviews.高容量医院与手术结局之间关系的证据状况：系统评价的系统综述
J Am Coll Surg. 2013 May;216(5):1015-1025.e18. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.12.049. Epub 2013 Mar 22.
4
Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors.评估预后因素研究中的偏倚。
Ann Intern Med. 2013 Feb 19;158(4):280-6. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-4-201302190-00009.
5
Testing a tool for assessing the risk of bias for nonrandomized studies showed moderate reliability and promising validity.测试一种用于评估非随机研究偏倚风险的工具显示出了中等的可靠性和有前途的有效性。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Apr;66(4):408-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.09.016. Epub 2013 Jan 18.
6
A descriptive analysis of overviews of reviews published between 2000 and 2011.对 2000 年至 2011 年发表的综述概述进行描述性分析。
PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e49667. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049667. Epub 2012 Nov 15.
7
Overviews of reviews often have limited rigor: a systematic review.综述的概述通常严谨性有限：系统综述。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Dec;65(12):1267-73. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.06.015. Epub 2012 Sep 6.
8
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the volume-outcome relationship in pancreatic surgery.胰腺外科手术量效关系的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Br J Surg. 2011 Apr;98(4):485-94. doi: 10.1002/bjs.7413.
9
A proposed method of bias adjustment for meta-analyses of published observational studies.一种用于调整发表观察性研究荟萃分析中偏差的方法。
Int J Epidemiol. 2011 Jun;40(3):765-77. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyq248. Epub 2010 Dec 23.
10
The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study.COSMIN 清单用于评估健康状况测量仪器测量性能研究的方法学质量：一项国际 Delphi 研究。
Qual Life Res. 2010 May;19(4):539-49. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9606-8. Epub 2010 Feb 19.

AMSTAR能否也应用于非随机研究的系统评价？

Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies?

作者信息

Pieper Dawid, Mathes Tim, Eikermann Michaela

机构信息

Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Ostmerheimer Str, 200, Building 38, D-51109 Cologne, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Res Notes. 2014 Sep 6;7:609. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-609.

DOI:10.1186/1756-0500-7-609
PMID:25193554
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4167129/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of an instrument to evaluate systematic reviews of non-randomized studies in epidemiological research. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) is widely used to evaluate the scientific quality of systematic reviews, but it has not been validated for SRs of non-randomized studies. The objective of this paper is to report our experience in applying AMSTAR to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies in terms of applicability, reliability and feasibility. Thus, we applied AMSTAR to a recently published review of 32 systematic reviews of non-randomized studies investigating the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery.

RESULTS

The inter-rater reliability was high (0.76), albeit items 8 (scientific quality used in formulating conclusions), 9 (appropriate method to combine studies), and 11 (conflicts of interest) scored moderate (≤0.58). However, there was a high heterogeneity between the two pairs of reviewers. In terms of feasibility, AMSTAR proved easy to apply to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies, each review taking 5-10 minutes to complete. We faced problems in applying three items, mainly related to scientific quality of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

AMSTAR showed good psychometric properties, comparable to prior findings in systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials. AMSTAR can be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies, although there are some item specific issues users should be aware of. Revisions and extensions of AMSTAR might be helpful.

摘要

背景

在流行病学研究中，缺乏一种用于评估非随机研究系统评价的工具。多项系统评价评估（AMSTAR）被广泛用于评估系统评价的科学质量，但尚未针对非随机研究的系统评价进行验证。本文的目的是报告我们在将AMSTAR应用于非随机研究系统评价时在适用性、可靠性和可行性方面的经验。因此，我们将AMSTAR应用于最近发表的一篇综述，该综述对32项关于手术中医院规模与结局关系的非随机研究的系统评价进行了分析。

结果

评分者间信度较高（0.76），尽管第8项（制定结论时使用的科学质量）、第9项（合并研究的适当方法）和第11项（利益冲突）得分中等（≤0.58）。然而，两对评审员之间存在高度异质性。在可行性方面，AMSTAR被证明易于应用于非随机研究的系统评价，每项评价完成时间为5 - 10分钟。我们在应用三个项目时遇到了问题，主要与纳入研究的科学质量有关。

结论

AMSTAR显示出良好的心理测量特性，与随机对照试验系统评价的先前结果相当。AMSTAR可应用于非随机研究的系统评价，尽管有一些特定项目的问题用户应予以注意。对AMSTAR进行修订和扩展可能会有所帮助。