AMSTAR-PF: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies

The ability to predict the onset or natural history of an illness, or how people may respond to a treatment, guides clinical decision making. These predictions are commonly based on prognostic factors: clinical, patient, or societal variables that are identified as being predictive of a certain future outcome. Prognostic factor research has increased across fields, with a subsequent increase in the number of systematic reviews of prognostic factors studies. Understanding the quality of such prognostic factor reviews is essential for confidence in their findings, but there is no quality appraisal instrument to specifically assess systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews of Prognostic Factor studies, AMSTAR-PF, has been developed to fill this gap.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMJ
Published
2025-12-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2025-085718
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.40

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AMSTAR-PF: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies

Lotty Hooft, Sarah B. Wallwork, Beverley Shea, Nicole Skoetz et al.
1 citations
BMJ
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
1.40
article

AMSTAR-PF: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies

Lotty Hooft, Sarah B. Wallwork, Beverley Shea, Nicole Skoetz, Karel G. M. Moons, Rebecca Riley, G Lorimer Moseley, Michael L Henry, Johanna A A Damen, Neil E O’Connell
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The ability to predict the onset or natural history of an illness, or how people may respond to a treatment, guides clinical decision making. These predictions are commonly based on prognostic factors: clinical, patient, or societal variables that are identified as being predictive of a certain future outcome. Prognostic factor research has increased across fields, with a subsequent increase in the number of systematic reviews of prognostic factors studies. Understanding the quality of such prognostic factor reviews is essential for confidence in their findings, but there is no quality appraisal instrument to specifically assess systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews of Prognostic Factor studies, AMSTAR-PF, has been developed to fill this gap.

BMJVol. 391
University of Ottawa (CA), University of South Australia (AU), University of Cologne (DE), Utrecht University (NL), University Medical Center Utrecht (NL), Bruyère (CA), University Hospital Cologne (DE), NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (GB), Brunel University of London (GB), University of Birmingham (GB)
University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Australian Government, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Medical Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council, Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
1.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.