Skip to main content

Table 2 AMSTAR methodological quality assessment of PAMG systematic reviews

From: Process description and evaluation of Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines development

Item Janssen [30] Warburton [31] Paterson [32] Rhodes [33] Latimer [34]
1. Was an "a priori" design provided? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2. Was there duplicate study selection and data extraction? Yes, but no strategy to resolve disagreements Yes, but no info on how to resolve disagreements re: data extraction. (Screening, data abstraction) Yes Yes for search, but no mention of use of duplicate review/data checks for abstraction Yes
3. Was a comprehensive literature search performed? Yes, search terms provided, but not exact search strategy Yes, but only report search strategy for MEDLINE (table two) Yes, but only report search strategy for MEDLINE
(table one)
Yes, search terms provided -- Appendix B, Medline only Yes (Identification of papers, Appendix one)
4. Was the status of publication (i.e., grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion? No No No No Unclear
5. Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided? No, only included studies No, only included studies No, only included studies Yes
(Appendix A)
No, only included studies
6. Were characteristics of included studies provided? Yes Yes (tables four-ten) Yes Yes (Table two, Appendix C) Yes
(Tables two, five, seven)
7. Was the scientific quality of the included studies assessed and documented? Yes (methods, results) Yes (methods) Yes
(methods,
table five)
Yes
(Appendix D)
Yes
(Tables one, four, six)
8. Was the scientific quality of the included studies used appropriately in formulating conclusions? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
9. Were the methods used to combine the findings of studies appropriate? Yes -- qualitative review appropriate Yes -- qualitative review appropriate -- suggest stating explicitly Yes -- qualitative review appropriate Yes, qualitative review appropriate Yes, qualitative review appropriate
10. Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed? No No No No No
11. Were potential conflicts of interest included? Yes Yes (Acknowledge-ments) Yes Yes (Competing interests) Yes
  1. This table outlines the methodological quality assessment of each of the systematic reviews using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool (AMSTAR) [43].