Tools for the Critical Appraisal of Systematic Reviews

Article Sidebar

PDF (Spanish) PDF HTML (Spanish)

Main Article Content

Juan Pablo Rodriguez
Centro Cochrane Asociado, Universidad Hospital Italiano. Bueno Aires, Argentina
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9096-6332
Estefania Quarteroni
Centro Cochrane Asociado, Universidad Hospital Italiano. Bueno Aires, Argentina
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6075-9945
Luis Ignacio Garegnani
Centro Cochrane Asociado, Universidad Hospital Italiano. Bueno Aires, Argentina
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4605-9473

Abstract

Systematic reviews aim to collect, analyze, and synthesize all available scientific evidence on a specific research question. Although reviews are a fundamental tool for evidence-based decision-making, their correct interpretation and analysis can present certain challenges. This manuscript addresses different tools to guide the critical appraisal of systematic reviews and to determine their usefulness in supporting decision-making, based on two instruments: A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews Version 2 (AMSTAR 2) and the checklist of the United Kingdom Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). Critical appraisal of systematic reviews is crucial to ensure the validity, quality, and applicability of their results.

Downloads

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.displayStats.noStats##
Published: 2026-03-26
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51987/Rev.Hosp.Ital.B.Aires.v46i1.1274
Keywords:
systematic reviews, critical appraisal, analysis, evidence-based medicine

Article Details

Issue

Vol. 46 No. 1 (2026): Revista del Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires

Section

Notes on statistics and research
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

1.
Rodriguez JP, Quarteroni E, Garegnani LI. Tools for the Critical Appraisal of Systematic Reviews. Rev Hosp Ital B.Aires [Internet]. 2026 Mar. 26 [cited 2026 Jul. 31];46(1):e0001274. Available from: https://ojs.hospitalitaliano.org.ar/index.php/revistahi/article/view/1274

References

Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2011. 553 p.

Walker E, Hernandez AV, Kattan MW. Meta-analysis: its strengths and limitations. Cleve Clin J Med. 2008;75(6):431-439.

Mendis K. What is evidence-based medicine? Ceylon Med J. 2021;66(3):154-156.

Río-de-la-Loza-Zamora JG, López-Ortiz G. Barreras para el desarrollo de investigación en medicina familiar en Iberoamérica: revisión sistemática. Rev Mex Med Fam. 2022;30;9(2):49-58.

Sgarbossa N, Ibáñez Cobaisse M, González Cianciulli G, et al. Revisiones sistemáticas: conceptos clave para profesionales de la salud. Medwave. 2022;22(9):2622.

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. How to use the CASP checklists [Internet]. Oxford: CASP; 2025 [consulta 2025 may 20]. Disponible en: https://casp-uk.net/how-to-use-checklist/.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.

Whiting P, Savović J, Higgins JP, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;69:225-234.

Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10.

Ciapponi A. AMSTAR-2: herramienta de evaluación crítica de revisiones sistemáticas de estudios de intervenciones de salud. Evid Actual Pract Ambul . 2018;21(1):4-13.

von Luckner A, Riederer F. Magnesium in migraine prophylaxis-is there an evidence-based rationale? A systematic review. Headache. 2018;58(2):199-209.

Talandashti MK, Shahinfar H, Delgarm P, et al. Effects of selected dietary supplements on migraine prophylaxis: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Neurol Sci. 2025;46(2):651-670.