Skip to main content

Table 3 Methodological quality of included reviews. (AMSTAR-2a)

From: Patients’ perceptions with musculoskeletal disorders regarding their experience with healthcare providers and health services: an overview of reviews

Reviews Q1 Q2c Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9c Q10 Q11c Q12c Q13c Q14 Q15c Q16 Qualityb
Scoping reviews
 Hopayian, 2014 [47] Y NA N PY Y Y N PY NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Zuidema, 2015 [38] Y NA N PY Y Y N N NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Wluka, 2016 [54] Y NA N PY N N N PY NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Chou, 2017 [21] Y NA N PY Y Y N Y NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Papandony, 2017 [22] Y NA N PY Y Y N Y NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Gillespie, 2017 [46] Y NA N PY Y Y N PY NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Chou, 2018 [19] Y NA N PY Y N N Y NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Chou, 2018 [20] Y NA Y PY Y Y N Y NA N NA NA NA N NA Y Moderate
 Chou, 2018 [25] Y NA Y PY Y Y N Y NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Segan, 2018 [26] Y NA Y PY N N N PY NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Chou, 2018 [52] Y NA Y PY Y N N PY NA N NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
 Asif, 2019 [55] Y NA N PY Y N N PY NA Y NA NA NA Y NA Y Moderate
Systematic reviews
 Verbeek, 2004 [50] Y N N PY N Y N PY N N NA NA N Y NA Y Low
 Slade, 2010 [23] Y N Y PY N N N N N N NA NA N Y NA Y Critically low
 Campbell, 2011 [44] Y N Y PY Y N N PY Y N NA NA N Y NA Y Low
 Doyle, 2013 [10] Y PY N N N N N Y N N NA NA N Y NA Y Critically low
 Fu, 2016 [37] Y N N PY N N N N N N NA NA Y Y NA Y Critically low
 Hulen, 2016 [43] Y N Y PY Y Y PY PY N N NA NA N N NA Y Low
 McMurray, 2016 [48] Y N N Y Y Y N Y N N NA NA N Y NA Y Critically low
 Wijma, 2017 [24] Y PY Y Y N N N Y Y N NA NA Y Y NA Y Moderate
 Raybould, 2018 [45] Y N N PY N Y N PY PY N NA NA N N NA Y Low
 Lim, 2019 [36] Y PY Y PY Y Y N PY Y N NA NA Y Y NA Y Low
 Connelly, 2019 [42] Y PY Y PY N Y Y PY Y N NA NA Y N NA Y Moderate
 Davenport, 2019 [56] Y N Y PY Y Y N PY N Y NA NA N Y NA Y Critically low
Systematic reviews with meta-analysis
 O’Neill, 2007 [40] Y N N N N N N Y N N Y N N Y N Y Critically low
 Hush, 2011 [51] Y PY Y PY N Y N PY N N Y N Y Y N N Low
 Slade, 2014 [49] Y N Y PY Y Y N PY Y N Y N N N N Y Low
 O’Keeffe, 2016 [41] Y Y Y Y Y Y N PY PY N Y N N Y N Y Low
 Rothmann, 2018 [39] Y Y N PY N N N PY PY N Y N Y Y N Y Moderate
 Rossettini, 2018 [53] Y Y Y PY Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Moderate
  1. aA MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) tool. bcalculated by AMSTAR-2 checklist [36] Y yes, N no, PY partial yes, NA not applicable. cQ2, Q9, Q13 are not applicable for scoping reviews, and Q11, Q12, and Q15 are only applicable for studies with meta-analysis
  2. Q1. Did the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include the components of PICO? Q2. Did the report of the review contain an explicit statement that the review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review and did the report justify any significant deviations from the protocol? Q3. Did the review authors explain their selection of the study designs for inclusion in the review? Q4. Did the review authors use a comprehensive literature search strategy? Q5. Did the review authors perform study selection in duplicate? Q6. Did the review authors perform data extraction in duplicate? Q7. Did the review authors provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions? Q8. Did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail? Q9. Did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias in individual studies that were included in the review? Q10. Did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review? Q11. If meta-analysis was performed did the review authors use appropriate methods for statistical combination of results? RCTs Q12. If meta-analysis was performed, did the review authors assess the potential impact of RoB in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis or other evidence synthesis? Q13. Did the review authors account for RoB in individual studies when interpreting/ discussing the results of the review? Q14. Did the review authors provide a satisfactory explanation for, and discussion of, any heterogeneity observed in the results of the review? Q15. If they performed quantitative synthesis did the review authors carry out an adequate investigation of publication bias (small study bias) and discuss its likely impact on the results of the review? Q16. Did the review authors report any potential sources of conflict of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review?