- Framework of problems / Objective
- High risk of bias (ROBIS)
- 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 |
| Journal | HUMAN VACCINES & IMMUNOTHERAPEUTICS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2019 |
| URL | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/21645515.2019.1631567?needAccess=true |
| 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 |