Repository logo
 
Publication

Quality and risk of bias appraisals of systematic reviews are inconsistent across reviewers and centers

2020Journal article Open access
Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorGates, Michelle
dc.contributor.authorGates, Allison
dc.contributor.authorDuarte, Gonçalo Silva
dc.contributor.authorCary, Maria
dc.contributor.authorBecker, Monika
dc.contributor.authorPrediger, Barbara
dc.contributor.authorVandermeer, Ben
dc.contributor.authorFernandes, Ricardo M.
dc.contributor.authorPieper, Dawid
dc.contributor.authorHartling, Lisa
dc.date.accessioned2022-11-29T17:03:04Z
dc.date.available2022-11-29T17:03:04Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.description© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).pt_PT
dc.description.abstractObjective: The objective of the study was to evaluate the inter-rater and intercenter reliability, usability, and utility of A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR), AMSTAR 2, and Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews (ROBIS). Study design and setting: This is a prospective evaluation using 30 systematic reviews of randomized trials, undertaken at three international centers. Results: Reviewers completed AMSTAR, AMSTAR 2, and ROBIS in median (interquartile range) 15.7 (11.3), 19.7 (12.1), and 28.7 (17.4) minutes and reached consensus in 2.6 (3.2), 4.6 (5.3), and 10.9 (10.8) minutes, respectively. Across all centers, inter-rater reliability was substantial to almost perfect for 8/11 AMSTAR, 9/16 AMSTAR 2, and 12/24 ROBIS items. Intercenter reliability was substantial to almost perfect for 6/11 AMSTAR, 12/16 AMSTAR 2, and 7/24 ROBIS items. Intercenter reliability for confidence in the results of the review or overall risk of bias was moderate (Gwet's first-order agreement coefficient (AC1) 0.58, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.30 to 0.85) to substantial (AC1 0.74, 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.85) for AMSTAR 2 and poor (AC1 -0.21, 95% CI: -0.55 to 0.13) to moderate (AC1 0.56, 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.83) for ROBIS. It is not clear whether using the appraisals of any tool as an inclusion criterion would alter an overview's findings. Conclusions: Improved guidance may be needed to facilitate the consistent interpretation and application of the newer tools (especially ROBIS).pt_PT
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionpt_PT
dc.identifier.citationJ Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Sep;125:9-15pt_PT
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.04.026pt_PT
dc.identifier.eissn1878-5921
dc.identifier.issn0895-4356
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10451/55294
dc.language.isoengpt_PT
dc.peerreviewedyespt_PT
dc.publisherElsevierpt_PT
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/journal-of-clinical-epidemiologypt_PT
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/pt_PT
dc.subjectAMSTARpt_PT
dc.subjectAMSTAR 2pt_PT
dc.subjectMethodological qualitypt_PT
dc.subjectROBISpt_PT
dc.subjectRisk of biaspt_PT
dc.subjectSystematic reviewspt_PT
dc.titleQuality and risk of bias appraisals of systematic reviews are inconsistent across reviewers and centerspt_PT
dc.typejournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.endPage15pt_PT
oaire.citation.startPage9pt_PT
oaire.citation.titleJournal of Clinical Epidemiologypt_PT
oaire.citation.volume125pt_PT
person.familyNameDuarte
person.familyNameFernandes
person.givenNameGonçalo
person.givenNameRicardo
person.identifier309018
person.identifier.orcid0000-0001-7802-1897
person.identifier.orcid0000-0002-7253-6475
person.identifier.ridL-4920-2015
person.identifier.ridC-7501-2015
person.identifier.scopus-author-id24436565500
rcaap.rightsopenAccesspt_PT
rcaap.typearticlept_PT
relation.isAuthorOfPublication06baa442-3f09-4ee2-b0ee-cf3036a26afd
relation.isAuthorOfPublication862be38f-2247-424c-b26c-d3bdda4474be
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery862be38f-2247-424c-b26c-d3bdda4474be

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
Quality_bias.pdf
Size:
217.78 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.2 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

IMM - Artigos em Revistas Internacionais
FM - Artigos em Revistas Internacionais