Published in Syst Rev on April 12, 2016
Resuming the discussion of AMSTAR: What can (should) be made better? BMC Med Res Methodol (2016) 0.79
Evaluation of AMSTAR to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol (2017) 0.75
Methodological quality of systematic reviews referenced in clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of opioid use disorder. PLoS One (2017) 0.75
GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ (2008) 33.10
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol (2009) 17.92
The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA (1999) 17.00
Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol (2007) 13.46
Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med (2001) 7.94
AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol (2009) 6.00
Opioid prescribing: a systematic review and critical appraisal of guidelines for chronic pain. Ann Intern Med (2014) 3.57
Early-life determinants of overweight and obesity: a review of systematic reviews. Obes Rev (2010) 2.99
The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies--a synthesis of systematic review findings. J Eval Clin Pract (2008) 2.79
External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). PLoS One (2007) 2.70
Effective training strategies for teaching communication skills to physicians: an overview of systematic reviews. Patient Educ Couns (2010) 2.25
Effects of clinical decision-support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a synthesis of high-quality systematic review findings. J Am Med Inform Assoc (2011) 2.12
Methodology and reporting of meta-analyses in the neurosurgical literature. J Neurosurg (2014) 2.10
Evaluation of the endorsement of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement on the quality of published systematic review and meta-analyses. PLoS One (2013) 2.05
Management of TMD: evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J Oral Rehabil (2010) 1.69
From Systematic Reviews to Clinical Recommendations for Evidence-Based Health Care: Validation of Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (R-AMSTAR) for Grading of Clinical Relevance. Open Dent J (2010) 1.60
ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol (2015) 1.44
The methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies in dentistry. Vet J (2011) 1.39
The evidence on surgical interventions for low back disorders, an overview of systematic reviews. Eur Spine J (2013) 1.36
Advances in childhood immunisation in South Africa: where to now? Programme managers' views and evidence from systematic reviews. BMC Public Health (2012) 1.20
Risk factors for neck and upper extremity disorders among computers users and the effect of interventions: an overview of systematic reviews. PLoS One (2011) 1.19
Quality of reviews on sugar-sweetened beverages and health outcomes: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr (2011) 1.13
Effectiveness of aquatic exercise and balneotherapy: a summary of systematic reviews based on randomized controlled trials of water immersion therapies. J Epidemiol (2009) 1.07
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of home telemonitoring interventions for patients with chronic diseases: a critical assessment of their methodological quality. J Med Internet Res (2013) 1.05
Effects of exercise in the treatment of overweight and obese children and adolescents: a systematic review of meta-analyses. J Obes (2013) 1.02
Reliability and External Validity of AMSTAR in Assessing Quality of TCM Systematic Reviews. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med (2012) 1.02
An AMSTAR assessment of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of oral healthcare interventions published in the Journal of Applied Oral Science (JAOS). J Appl Oral Sci (2011) 1.00
An Overview of Systematic Reviews on Prognostic Factors in Neck Pain: Results from the International Collaboration on Neck Pain (ICON) Project. Open Orthop J (2013) 0.98
Quality assessment of systematic reviews or meta-analyses of nursing interventions conducted by Korean reviewers. BMC Med Res Methodol (2012) 0.97
The effectiveness of interventions in the management of patients with primary frozen shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br (2010) 0.95
Evaluation of methodology and quality characteristics of systematic reviews in orthodontics. Orthod Craniofac Res (2011) 0.95
Systematic reviews published in higher impact clinical journals were of higher quality. J Clin Epidemiol (2014) 0.94
Methodological quality of systematic reviews on influenza vaccination. Vaccine (2014) 0.92
Quality varies across clinical practice guidelines for mammography screening in women aged 40-49 years as assessed by AGREE and AMSTAR instruments. J Clin Epidemiol (2011) 0.91
Effectiveness of Pilates exercise in treating people with chronic low back pain: a systematic review of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol (2013) 0.90
Reviews examining sugar-sweetened beverages and body weight: correlates of their quality and conclusions. Am J Clin Nutr (2014) 0.89
Nonallergic comorbidities of atopic eczema: an overview of systematic reviews. Allergy (2013) 0.88
Methodological quality and descriptive characteristics of prosthodontic-related systematic reviews. J Oral Rehabil (2013) 0.86
Methodological quality of meta-analyses on the blood pressure response to exercise: a review. J Hypertens (2014) 0.86
Reporting characteristics of meta-analyses in orthodontics: methodological assessment and statistical recommendations. Eur J Orthod (2013) 0.85
Evidence-based periodontal plastic surgery: an assessment of quality of systematic reviews in the treatment of recession-type defects. J Clin Periodontol (2010) 0.84
Proteomic signature of periodontal disease in pregnancy: Predictive validity for adverse outcomes. Bioinformation (2011) 0.84
Interrater reliability of grading strength of evidence varies with the complexity of the evidence in systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol (2013) 0.84
Systematic reviews supporting practice guideline recommendations lack protection against bias. J Clin Epidemiol (2013) 0.83
Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of two different approaches. PLoS One (2012) 0.82
Effects of exercise on depressive symptoms in adults with arthritis and other rheumatic disease: a systematic review of meta-analyses. BMC Musculoskelet Disord (2014) 0.82
Can AMSTAR also be applied to systematic reviews of non-randomized studies? BMC Res Notes (2014) 0.81
Treatment of patients with multiple myeloma: an overview of systematic reviews. Acta Haematol (2010) 0.80
Meta review of systematic and meta analytic reviews on movement differences, effect of movement based interventions, and the underlying neural mechanisms in autism spectrum disorder. Front Integr Neurosci (2013) 0.79
Critical appraisal of systematic reviews on the effect of a history of periodontitis on dental implant loss. J Clin Periodontol (2013) 0.78
Methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews on tuberculosis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis (2013) 0.77
Quality assessment of systematic reviews on periodontal regeneration in humans. J Periodontol (2012) 0.77
Quality assessment of the methods used in published opioid conversion reviews. J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother (2012) 0.77
Methodological quality of systematic reviews and clinical trials on women's health published in a Brazilian evidence-based health journal. Clinics (Sao Paulo) (2013) 0.77
A flood tide of systematic reviews on endodontic posts: methodological assessment using of R-AMSTAR. Clin Oral Investig (2013) 0.77
Sublingual immunotherapy in children with allergic rhinitis: quality of systematic reviews. Pediatr Allergy Immunol (2011) 0.77
A critical appraisal of the systematic review process: systematic reviews of zirconia single crowns. J Prosthet Dent (2014) 0.76
A practitioner's guide to developing critical appraisal skills: reviews of research. J Am Dent Assoc (2013) 0.76