Table 3

R-AMSTAR scores for methodological quality of systematic reviews
Systematic Review R-AMSTAR Scores Per Criterion (/4)* R-AMSTAR Total (/44)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Aladro-Gonzalvo et al. 2012 [10] 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 37
La Touche et al. (2008) [6] 3 2 2 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 19
Lim et al. (2011) [7] 4 2 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 1 35
Pereira et al. (2012) [8] 3 4 4 3 2 2 4 2 4 2 2 32
Posadzki et al. (2011) [9] 3 4 3 4 4 2 3 4 1 1 1 30
* Note:
R-AMSTAR Item Description
1. Was an ‘a priori’ design provided?
2. Was there duplicate study selection and data extraction?
3. Was a comprehensive literature search performed?
4. Was the status of publication (i.e. grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion?
5. Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided?
6. Were the characteristics of the included studies provided?
7. Was the scientific quality of the included studies assessed and documented?
8. Was the scientific quality of the included studies used appropriately in formulating conclusions?
9. Were the methods used to combine the findings of studies appropriate?
10. Was the likelihood of publication bias (a.k.a. “file drawer” effect) assessed?
11. Was the conflict of interest stated?
R-AMSTAR Score Interpretation
1 Score if satisfied 0 of the criteria [Items 1,2,4,6,10,11] or 0 or 1 of the criteria [Items 3,5, 7–9]
2 Score if satisfied 1 of the criteria [Items 1,2,4,6,10,11] or 2 of the criteria [Items 3,5, 7–9]
3 Score if satisfied 2 of the criteria [Items 1,2,4,6,10,11] or 3 of the criteria [Items 3,5, 7–9]
4 Score if satisfies 3 of the criteria [Items 1,2,4,6,10,11] or 4 of the criteria [Items 3,5, 7–9]

Adapted from Kung, Chiappelli, Cajulis, Avezova, Kossan, 2010 [15].

Wells et al.

Wells et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2013 13:7   doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-7

Open Data