Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41592834›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2026

Agreement testing of AMSTAR-PF, a tool for quality appraisal of systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies.

Michael L Henry, Neil E O'Connell, Richard D Riley, Karel G M Moons, Beverley J Shea, Lotty Hooft, Sarah B Wallwork, Johanna A A G Damen, Nicole Skoetz, Ruth P Appiah and 19 more

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

29 authors.

Michael L HenryIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2871-6695
Neil E O'ConnellCentre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Department of Health Sciences, Brunel University London, London, UK Neil.OConnell@brunel.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1989-4537
Richard D RileyDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8699-0735
Karel G M MoonsCochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Beverley J SheaSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Lotty HooftCochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Sarah B WallworkIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Johanna A A G DamenCochrane Netherlands, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Nicole SkoetzInstitute of Public Health, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Ruth P AppiahIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Carolyn BerrymanIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Sophie M CrouchIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Grace A FerenczIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Ashley R GrantIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Katherine M HenryPrincess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia.
Aleksandra M HermanNencki Institute of Experimental Biology Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland.
Emma L KarranIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Indika KoralegederaIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Hayley B LeakeIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Erin MacIntyreIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Brendan MouattIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Karma PhuentshoIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Daniel A Van Der LaanIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Ellana WelsbyIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Louise K WilesIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Erica M WilkinsonIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Marelle K WilsonIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Monique V WilsonIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
G Lorimer MoseleyIIMPACT in Health, Adelaide University, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo test the agreement and usability of a novel quality appraisal tool: A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews of Prognostic Factor studies (AMSTAR-PF).

designObservational study.

participants14 appraisers of varied experience levels and backgrounds, including undergraduate, master's and PhD students, postgraduate researchers, research fellows and clinicians. STUDY PROCEDURE: Eight systematic reviews were rated by all reviewers using AMSTAR-PF. OUTCOME MEASURES: Planned measures included intrapair and inter-pair agreement using Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa, time of use and time to reach consensus. Interrater agreement was an added measure, and Gwet's agreement coefficient was calculated and presented due to its greater stability across agreement levels. The percentage of intrapair agreements identical or one category apart was also presented.

resultsInterrater agreement averaged 0.59 (range 0.21-0.90), inter-pair agreement 0.61 (range 0.24-0.91) and intrapair agreement 0.75 (range 0.45-0.95) across the domains, with agreement for the overall rating 0.46 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.62) for interrater agreement, 0.46 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.74) for inter-pair agreement and 0.68 (range of averages 0.22-1.00) for intrapair agreement. The majority (60.7%) of intrapair ratings were identical, with 94.6% of final ratings either identical or only one category different for the overall appraisal. The time taken to appraise a study with AMSTAR-PF improved with use and averaged around 34 min after the first two appraisals.

conclusionsDespite some variance in agreement for different domains and between different appraisers, the testing results suggest that AMSTAR-PF has clear utility for appraising the quality of systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies.

Indexed as

Systematic Reviews as TopicHumansObserver VariationPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsPrognosisSTATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODSSystematic Review

Identifiers

PMID41592834
PMCPMC12853518

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.