Use of AMSTAR-2 in the methodological assessment of systematic reviews: protocol for a methodological study

Cuncun Lu; Tingting Lu; Long Ge; Nan Yang; Peijing Yan; Kehu Yang

doi:10.21037/atm-20-392a

Use of AMSTAR-2 in the methodological assessment of systematic reviews: protocol for a methodological study

Ann Transl Med. 2020 May;8(10):652. doi: 10.21037/atm-20-392a.

Authors

Cuncun Lu^{1

2}, Tingting Lu^{1

2}, Long Ge^{1

2}, Nan Yang^{1

2}, Peijing Yan³, Kehu Yang^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
² Evidence-Based Social Science Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
³ Institute of Clinical Research and Evidence Based Medicine, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou 730000, China.

Abstract

Background: Systematic reviews (SRs) with or without meta-analyses (MAs) are widely used in resolving questions in various healthcare areas (such as, traditional Chinese medicine, public health and surgery), and they are the cornerstone of evidence-based healthcare. However, the reliability of SRs is typically influenced by their methodological quality. AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) and AMSTAR-2 tools can assess the methodological quality of SRs, and the use of AMSTAR has been investigated. However, AMSTAR-2 is now widely used to evaluate the methodological quality of SRs, but the use of AMSTAR-2 for determining the methodological quality of SRs has not yet been investigated and assessed thoroughly. Thus, we designed the present study to investigate the use of AMSTAR-2 in studies that assessed the methodological quality of a sample of SRs with the AMSTAR-2 and provide references to potential users of AMSTAR-2 tool.

Methods: Four commonly used electronic databases including PubMed, EmBase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science will be searched following a comprehensive search strategy to identify and retrieve studies that have used AMSTAR-2 tool for evaluating the methodological quality of SRs. Two independent authors will retrieve bibliometric information and methodological data, including all author names, time of publication, and journal names, whether a specific score value was given for each item, and whether overall quality assessment was performed. Descriptive statistical analyses will be used to present the study results, e.g., frequencies and percentages, mean and standard deviation (SD) or median and interquartile range (IQR). In addition, subgroup analyses will be performed to identify the methodological differences (e.g., the reporting of study designs included in SRs) between overviews and methodological studies. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) will be calculated to measure the methodological differences. Cytoscape 3.7.1 software tool will be used to construct collaboration network maps. Further, Microsoft Office Excel 2016 and Stata 12.0 will be used to manage and analyze data.

Discussion: The results of this study will identify any gaps in the use of AMSTAR-2 and important bibliometric features, such as active researchers and journals, provide guidance to researchers in various healthcare areas (such as, traditional Chinese medicine and public health) for using AMSTAR-2 tool and help them in developing cooperation and submitting their manuscripts.

Keywords: AMSTAR-2; Systematic reviews (SRs); healthcare; public health; quality; surgery; traditional Chinese medicine.