Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 AMSTAR Assessment according to quality items

From: Quality assessment of systematic reviews or meta-analyses of nursing interventions conducted by Korean reviewers

Quality items “Yes” (%) “No” “Cannot answer” “Not applicable”
n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%)
1 Was an "a prior" design provided? 22 (100.0) 0 0 0
2 Was there duplicate study selection and data extraction? 3 (13.6) 17 (77.3) 2 (9.1) 0
3 Was a comprehensive literature search performed? 11 (50.0) 5 (22.7) 6 (27.3) 0
4 Was the status of publication (i.e. grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion? 4 (18.2) 6 (27.3) 12 (54.5) 0
5 Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided? 4 (18.2) 14 (63.6) 4 (18.2) 0
6 Were the characteristics of the included studies provided? 22 (100.0) 0 0 0
7 Was the scientific quality of the included studies assessed and documented? 3 (13.6) 17 (77.3) 2 (9.1) 0
8 Was the scientific quality of the included studies used appropriately in formulating conclusions? 3 (13.6) 18 (81.8) 1 (4.5) 0
9 Were the methods used to combine the findings of studies appropriate? 16 (72.7) 6 (27.3) 0 0
10 Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed? 5 (22.7) 16 (72.7) 1 (4.5) 0
11 Was the conflict of interest stated? 11 (50.0) 11 (50.0) 0 0