Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality assessment of the reviews using AMSTAR

From: Effectiveness of early intervention programs for parents of preterm infants: a meta-review of systematic reviews

Study

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Total

Benzies et al., 2013 [30]

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

6

Boundy et al., 2016 [21]

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

1

1

7

Brett et al., 2011 [25]

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

5

Evans et al., 2014 [26]

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

1

0

0

4

Goyal et al., 2013 [33]

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

1

0

0

4

Herd, et al., 2014 [32]

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

1

0

1

5

Lawn et al., 2010 [31]

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

1

0

1

5

McGregor and Casey, 2012 [35]

0

0

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

2

Spittle et al., 2015 [34]

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

9

Vanderveen et al., 2009 [23]

0

0

1

0

0

1

0

0

1

0

0

3

Zhang et al., 2014 [24]

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

4

  1. AMSTAR TOOL Key: 1 = Yes, 0 = No/Unclear/Not applicable. Areas assessed are numbered 1 to 11 on horizontal axis; 1-Priori design provided, 2-Duplicate selection/extraction, 3-Comprehensive literature search conducted, 4-Status of publication (i.e, grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion, 5-List of included & excluded studies provided, 6-Characteristics of included studies provided, 7-Quality of included studies assessed and documented, 8-Use of the scientific quality of the studies in formulating conclusions, 9-Use of appropriate methods to combine the findings of studies, 10-Assessment of publication bias, 11- Conflict of interest included