Skip to main content

Table 2 Results of AMSTAR assessment

From: Overview of systematic reviews of therapeutic ranges: methodologies and recommendations for practice

  Pryblyski 2015 Konidari 2014 Moreu 2014 Sparshatt 2009 Knight 2008 Osterman 2006 Cooney 2016 Sparshatt 2010 Zuk 2009 Bishara 2013
Was an a priori design (protocol) provided?
Was there duplicate study selection and data extraction?
Was a comprehensive literature search performed?
Was the status of publication (i.e. grey literature) used as a criterion?
Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided?
Were the characteristics of the included studies provided?
Was the scientific quality of the included studies assessed?
Was the scientific quality of the studies used in formulating conclusions?
Were the methods used to combine the findings of the studies appropriate?a
Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed?b N/A N/A
Was a conflict of interest included?
  1. aMethods used to combine the findings of studies were deemed inappropriate if no a priori statistical techniques were outlined in the methodology
  2. bAMSTAR methodology states systematic reviews with <10 studies included do not to assess publication bias (marked N/A)