Loading...

Quality Assessment Results

Education_for_sustainable_development_in_higher_education_evaluating_coherence_between_theory_and_praxis.pdf

Status: Completed
Document Type: Systematic Review
Assessment Tool: AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) - 16 items
Assessment completed!
16/16
Next check in: 5 seconds
0.0%
Overall Quality Score
0/16 criteria met

Assessment Details

Assessment Criterion AI Analysis AI Judgment Issues
Did the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include the components of PICO?
sr_q1
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
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?
sr_q2
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors explain their selection of the study designs for inclusion in the review?
sr_q3
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors use a comprehensive literature search strategy?
sr_q4
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors perform study selection in duplicate?
sr_q5
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors perform data extraction in duplicate?
sr_q6
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions?
sr_q7
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail?
sr_q8
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies that were included in the review?
sr_q9
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review?
sr_q10
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
If meta-analysis was performed, did the review authors use appropriate methods for statistical combination of results?
sr_q11
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
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?
sr_q12
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors account for RoB in individual studies when interpreting/discussing the results of the review?
sr_q13
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors provide a satisfactory explanation for, and discussion of, any heterogeneity observed in the results of the review?
sr_q14
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
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?
sr_q15
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Did the review authors report any potential sources of conflict of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review?
sr_q16
No detailed reasoning provided
Error: No judgment found
Assessment Summary
16
Total Criteria
0
Criteria Met
16
Issues Found
0.0%
Quality Score

Document Preview