Skip to main content

Table 3 Interrater agreement for AMSTAR

From: Comparison of methodological quality rating of systematic reviews on neuropathic pain using AMSTAR and R-AMSTAR

Item Gwet’s AC1 SEM 95% CI
1. Was an ‘a priori’ design provided 0.90 0.04 0.82–0.99
2. Was there duplicate study selection and data extraction 0.47 0.09 0.29–0.66
3. Was a comprehensive literature search performed 0.92 0.03 0.85–0.98
4. Was the status of publication (i.e. grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion 0.03 0.11 −0.19-0.24
5. Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided 0.63 0.08 0.47–0.79
6. Were the characteristics of the included studies provided −0.09 0.10 −0.30-0.12
7. Was the scientific quality of the included studies assessed and documented 0.89 0.04 0.81–0.97
8. Was the scientific quality of the included studies used appropriately in formulating conclusions 0.68 0.08 0.53–0.83
9. Were the methods used to combine the findings of studies appropriate 0.88 0.04 0.79–0.96
10. Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed 0.76 0.07 0.62–0.89
11. Was the conflict of interest included 0.80 0.05 0.70–0.91
Overall agreement (mean score of 11 items) 0.62 0.10 0.39–0.86
  1. AMSTAR Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews checklist, SEM standard error of the mean, CI confidence interval