Dental Students’ Use of AMSTAR to Critically Appraise Systematic Reviews

Journal of Dental Education

Volumn 79, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 1031-1039

  Teich, Sorin T ^a   Heima, Masahiro ^a   Lang, Lisa ^a  

^a CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

AMSTAR; critical thinking; dental education; evidence based dentistry; methods; research; systematic review

Indexed keywords

A MEASUREMENT TOOL TO ASSESS SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CRITICAL THINKING; DENTAL EDUCATION; DENTAL STUDENT; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT PLANNING; CHECKLIST; DECISION MAKING; DENTAL RESEARCH; EDUCATION; EVIDENCE BASED DENTISTRY; LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; STANDARDS; THINKING;

CHECKLIST; DECISION MAKING; DENTAL RESEARCH; EDUCATION, DENTAL; EVIDENCE-BASED DENTISTRY; HUMANS; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; PUBLICATION BIAS; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; STUDENTS, DENTAL; THINKING;

EID: 84945370040     PISSN: 00220337     EISSN: 19307837     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/j.0022-0337.2015.79.9.tb05996.x     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. Chiappelli F., Prolo P., Newman M. et al. Evidence-based practice in dentistry: benefit or hindrance. J Dent Res 2003; 82 (1): 6–7.
2. Guyatt G., Cairns J., Churchill D. et al. Evidence-based medicine. JAMA 1992; 268 (17): 2420–5.
3. Iacopino A.M. The influence of “new science” on dental education: current concepts, trends, and models for the future. J Dent Educ 2007; 71 (4): 450–62.
4. Sackett D.L., Rosenberg W., Gray J. et al. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996; 312 (7023): 71–2.
5. Winning T., Needleman I., Rohlin M. et al. Evidence-based care and the curriculum. Eur J Dent Educ 2008; 12 (s1): 48–63.
6. American Dental Association. ADA policy on evidence-based dentistry. Chicago: American Dental Association, 2008.
7. Taylor R., Reeves B., Ewings P. et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness of critical appraisal skills training for clinicians. Med Educ 2000; 34 (2): 120–5.
8. Young T., Rohwer A., Volmink J., Clarke M. What are the effects of teaching evidence-based health care? Overview of systematic reviews. PLOS One 2014; 9 (1): e86706.
9. Forester J.P., Cole M.S., Thomas P.P., McWhorter D.L. Introducing critical appraisal of biomedical literature to first-year medical students in histology. J Int Assoc Med Sci Educ 2007; 13 (1): 21–9.
10. Sackett D.L., Strauss S.E., Richardson W.E. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingston, 2000.
11. Smith R., Rennie D. Evidence-based medicine: an oral history. JAMA 2014; 311 (4): 365–7.
12. Glover J., Izzo D., Odata K. et al. EBM pyramid and EBM page generator. New Haven, CT: Yale University, 2006.
13. Sharif M.O., Sharif F.N.J., Ali H., Ahmed F. Systematic reviews explained: AMSTAR—how to tell the good from the bad and the ugly. Oral Health Dent Manag 2013; 12 (1): 9–16.
14. Dechartres A., Charles P., Hopewell S. et al. Reviews assessing the quality or the reporting of randomized controlled trials are increasing over time but raised questions about how quality is assessed. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64 (2): 136–44.
15. Katrak P., Bialocerkowski A.E., Massy-Westropp N. et al. A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools. BMC Med Res Methodol 2004; 4 (1): 22.
16. Vlayen J., Aertgeerts B., Hannes K. et al. A systematic review of appraisal tools for clinical practice guidelines: multiple similarities and one common deficit. Int J Qual Health Care 2005; 17 (3): 235–42.
17. Grilli R., Magrini N., Penna A. et al. Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: the need for a critical appraisal. Lancet 2000; 355 (9198): 103–6.
18. Jørgensen A.W., Maric K.L., Tendal B. et al. Industry-supported meta-analyses compared with meta-analyses with non-profit or no support: differences in methodological quality and conclusions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008; 8 (1): 60.
19. Jørgensen A.W., Hilden J., Gøtzsche P.C. Cochrane reviews compared with industry-supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic review. BMJ 2006; 333 (7572): 782.
20. Glenny A., Esposito M., Coulthard P., Worthington H. The assessment of systematic reviews in dentistry. Eur J Oral Sci 2003; 111 (2): 85–92.
21. Clarke M. Interpreting the results of systematic reviews. Semin Hematol 2008; 45 (3): 176–80.
22. O’Mathúna D.P. Tips and tricks: critical appraisal of systematic reviews. Int J Nurs Pract 2010; 16 (4): 414–8.
23. Richards D. Critically appraising systematic reviews. Evid Based Dent 2010; 11 (1): 27–9.
24. Tseng T.Y., Dahm P., Poolman R.W. et al. How to use a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J Urol 2008; 180 (4): 1249–56.
25. Oxman A.D., Guyatt G.H. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol 1991; 44 (11): 1271–8.
26. Oxman A.D., Guyatt G.H., Singer J. et al. Agreement among reviewers of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol 1991; 44 (1): 91–8.
27. Zlowodzki M., Poolman R.W., Kerkhoffs G.M. et al. How to interpret a meta-analysis and judge its value as a guide for clinical practice. Acta Orthop 2007; 78 (5): 598–609.
28. Shea B.J., Grimshaw J.M., Wells G.A. et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007; 7 (1): 10.
29. Shea B.J., Hamel C., Wells G.A. et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62 (10): 1013–20.
30. Faggion C.M. The development of evidence-based guidelines in dentistry. J Dent Educ 2013; 77 (2): 124–36.
31. Azarpazhooh A., Mayhall J.T., Leake J.L. Introducing dental students to evidence-based decisions in dental care. J Dent Educ 2008; 72 (1): 87–109.
32. Chiappelli F., Cajulis O.S. The logic model for evidence-based clinical decision making in dental practice. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2009; 9 (4): 206–10.
33. Wang X., Fan D., Swain M.V., Zhao K. A systematic review of all-ceramic crowns: clinical fracture rates in relation to restored tooth type. Int J Prosthod 2011; 25 (5): 441–50.
34. Guideline development for Hepatitis C virus screening, care, and treatment in low- and middle-income countries, PICO 5 treatment: a systematic review of the effectiveness of antiviral treatment compared with no treatment for chronic HCV infection. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2014.
35. Al-Amleh B., Lyons K., Swain M. Clinical trials in zirconia: a systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37 (8): 641–52.
36. Triwatana P., Nagaviroj N., Tulapornchai C. Clinical performance and failures of zirconia-based fixed partial dentures: a review literature. J Adv Prosthod 2012; 4 (2): 76–83.
37. Korayem M., Flores-Mir C., Nassar U., Olfert K. Implant site development by orthodontic extrusion: a systematic review. Angle Orthod 2008; 78 (4): 752–60.
38. Zou K.H., Tuncali K., Silverman S.G. Correlation and simple linear regression 1. Radiology 2003; 227 (3): 617–28.
39. Hopewell S., McDonald S., Clarke M., Egger M. Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007:2 (2).
40. Kung J., Chiappelli F., Cajulis O.O. et al. From systematic reviews to clinical recommendations for evidence-based health care: validation of revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR) for grading of clinical relevance. Open Dent J 2010; 4: 84–91.
41. McAuley L., Pham B., Tugwell P., Moher D. Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 2000; 356 (9237): 1228–31.
42. Romanov K., Aarnio M. A survey of the use of electronic scientific information resources among medical and dental students. BMC Med Educ 2006; 6 (1): 28.
43. Levine A.E., Bebermeyer R.D., Chen J.W. et al. Development of an interdisciplinary course in information resources and evidence-based dentistry. J Dent Educ 2008; 72 (9): 1067–76.
44. Cook D.J., Guyatt G.H., Ryan G. et al. Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses? Current convictions and controversies. JAMA 1993; 269 (21): 2749–53.
45. Fleming P.S., Seehra J., Polychronopoulou A. et al. Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in leading orthodontic journals: a quality paradigm? Eur J Orthod 2013; 35 (2): 244–8.
46. List T., Axelsson S. Management of TMD: evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37 (6): 430–51.
47. Elangovan S., Mawardi H.H., Karimbux N.Y. Quality assessment of systematic reviews on short dental implants. J Periodontol 2013; 84 (6): 758–67.
48. Schmitter M., Sterzenbach G., Faggion C.M.Jr, Krastl G. A flood tide of systematic reviews on endodontic posts: methodological assessment using R-AMSTAR. Clin Oral Investig 2013; 17 (5): 1287–94.
49. Sequeira-Byron P., Fedorowicz Z., Jagannath V.A., Sharif M.O. An AMSTAR assessment of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of oral health care interventions published in the Journal of Applied Oral Science. J Appl Oral Sci 2011; 19 (5): 440–7.
50. Suebnukarn S., Ngamboonsirisingh S., Rattanabanlang A. A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in endodontics. J Endod 2010; 36 (4): 602–8.
51. Delaney A., Bagshaw S.M., Ferland A. et al. The quality of reports of critical care meta-analyses in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews: an independent appraisal. Crit Care Med 2007; 35 (2): 589–94.
52. Faggion C.M., Atieh M.A., Park S. Search strategies in systematic reviews in periodontology and implant dentistry. J Clin Periodontol 2013; 40 (9): 883–8.
53. Jadad A.R., Cook D.J., Jones A. et al. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals. JAMA 1998; 280 (3): 278–80.
54. Spallek H., Song M., Polk D.E. et al. Barriers to implementing evidence-based clinical guidelines: a survey of early adopters. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2010; 10 (4): 195–206.