Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews of interventions aimed at improving vaccination coverage using AMSTAR and ROBIS checklists

Ref ID 303
First Author A. Jaca
Year Of Publishing 2019
Keywords Vaccination
Low methodological quality
Problem(s) Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
High risk of bias (ROBIS)
Number of systematic reviews included 57
Summary of Findings Methodological quality using AMSTAR found 32%, 60% and 9% of the included systematic reviews to have high, moderate and low quality, respectively. Risk of bias using ROBIS found included reviews had 74%, 14% and 12% of low, unclear and high risk of bias. Principal component analysis showed that systematic reviews with low risk of bias in ROBIS correlated with systematic reviews having high-quality in AMSTAR, and systematic reviews with high risk of bias in ROBIS correlated with low-quality systematic reviews in AMSTAR.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes