Skip to main content

Table 2 Methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews using the AMSTAR rating

From: Sedentary behaviour and adiposity in youth: a systematic review of reviews and analysis of causality

 

AMSTAR items

Author (Year)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11*

Overall rating

Azevedo et al. (2016)[43]

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

8

Bautista-Castano et al. (2004)[44]

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

No

2

Carson et al. (2016)[33]

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

6

Cliff et al. (2016)[34]

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

9

Costigan et al. (2013)[35]

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

5

DeMattia et al. (2007)[45]

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

6

Fletcher et al. (2015)[36]

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

6

Froberg & Raustorp (2014)[37]

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

Yes

5

Gorely et al. (2004)[38]

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

No

2

Leech et al. (2014)[39]

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

Yes

3

Leung et al. (2012)[46]

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

Yes

3

Liao et al. (2014)[47]

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

7

Luckner et al. (2012)[48]

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

5

Marshall et al. (2004)[9]

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

3

Mistry & Puthussery (2015)[25]

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

7

Mitchell & Byun (2014)[40]

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

Yes

2

Must & Tybor (2005)[28]

No

No

C/A

No

No

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

No

0

Pate et al. (2013)[29]

No

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

Yes

3

Prentice-Dunn & Prentice-Dunn (2012)[26]

Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

No

2

Ramsey Buchanan et al. (2016)[49]

C/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

8

Rey-Lopez et al. (2008)[41]

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

N/A

No

Yes

2

Saunders et al. (2016)[14]

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

C/A

No

Yes

6

Stice et al.(2006)[50]

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

5

Stierlin et al. (2015)[30]

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

6

Tanaka et al. (2014)[31]

No

No

C/A

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

5

Van Ekris et al. (2016)[32]

No

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

5

Wahi et al. (2011)[51]

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

8

Wu et al. (2016)[52]

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

6

Zhang et al. (2016)[27]

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

5

  1. *Criterion modified to only assess conflict of interest/source of funding statement of the review
  2. AMSTAR contains 11-items to appraise the methodological aspects of the systematic reviews. All 11-items were scored as “Yes”, “No”, “Can’t Answer” or “Not Applicable”. AMSTAR comprises the following items:
  3. 1. ‘a priori’ design provided;
  4. 2. duplicate study selection/data extraction;
  5. 3. comprehensive literature search;
  6. 4. status of publication as inclusion criteria (i.e., grey or unpublished literature);
  7. 5. list of studies included/excluded provided;
  8. 6. characteristics of included studies documented;
  9. 7. scientific quality assessed and documented;
  10. 8. appropriate formulation of conclusions (based on methodological rigor and scientific quality of the studies);
  11. 9. appropriate methods of combining studies (homogeneity test, effect model used and sensitivity analysis);
  12. 10. assessment of publication bias (graphic and/or statistical test); and
  13. 11. conflict of interest statement