Skip to content
Anchorcite

AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both

Beverley Shea, Barnaby C Reeves, George A. Wells, Micere Thuku, Candyce Hamel, Julian Moran, David Moher, Peter Tugwell, Vivian Andrea Welch, Elizabeth Kristjansson, David A Henry

BMJ · 2017 · 10,967 citationsOpen access

doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008Free full text

Abstract

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.

Cite this paper

Shea, B., Reeves, B. C., Wells, G. A., Thuku, M., Hamel, C., Moran, J., Moher, D., Tugwell, P., Welch, V. A., Kristjansson, E., & Henry, D. A. (2017). AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ, 358, j4008. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008

Read it with every claim anchored

Add this paper to a project, ask questions of it, and get answers that point to the exact passage.

Start free

Related papers

  1. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews2021
  2. The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data1977
  3. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement2009
  4. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test1997
  5. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation2018

Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0). Citations are generated from the published record.