The evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in orthodontic literature. Where do we stand?

European Journal of Orthodontics

Volumn 37, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 603-609

  Koletsi, Despina ^a   Fleming, Padhraig S ^b   Eliades, Theodore ^c   Pandis, Nikolaos ^d,e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS   (Greece)

^b QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^e NONE   (Greece)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COCHRANE LIBRARY; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; ORTHODONTICS; ORTHOPEDICS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SYNTHESIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; DENTAL RESEARCH; EVIDENCE BASED DENTISTRY; MALOCCLUSION; PUBLISHING; STANDARDS;

DENTAL RESEARCH; EVIDENCE-BASED DENTISTRY; HUMANS; MALOCCLUSION; ORTHODONTICS, CORRECTIVE; PUBLICATION BIAS;

EID: 84950139618     PISSN: 01415387     EISSN: 14602210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cju087     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Chalmers, I, and Altman, D. (1995). Systematic Reviews. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, London
2. Mulrow, C., Cook, D, and Davidoff, F. (1998). Systematic reviews: critical links in the great chain of evidence. In Mulrow, C, and Cook, D. (eds.), Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Health Care Decisions. American College of Physicians, Philadelphia, pp. 1-4.
3. Glenny, A.M., Esposito, M., Coulthard, P, and Worthington, H.V. (2003). The assessment of systematic reviews in dentistry. European Journal of Oral Sciences. 111, 85-92.
4. Flores-Mir, C., Major, P.M, and Major, P.W. (2006). Search, and selection methodology of systematic reviews in orthodontics (2000-2004). American Journal of Orthodontics, and Dentofacial Orthopedics: Official Publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, Its Constituent Societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. 130, 214-217.
5. Seehra, J., Fleming, P.S., Polychronopoulou, A, and Pandis N. (2013). Reporting completeness of abstracts of systematic reviews published in leading dental specialty journals. European Journal of Oral Sciences. 121, 57-62.
6. Atkins, D., et al. (2004). Systems for grading the quality of evidence, and the strength of recommendations I: critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group. BMC Health Services Research. 4, 38.
7. Guyatt, G.H., Oxman, A.D., Vist, G., Kunz, R., Falck-Ytter, Y., Alonso-Coello, P., Schünemann, H.J.; for the GRADE Working Group. (2008). GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence, and strength of recommendations. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 336, 924-926.
8. Papageorgiou, S.N., Papadopoulos, M.A, and Athanasiou, A.E. (2011). Evaluation of methodology, and quality characteristics of systematic reviews in orthodontics. Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research. 14, 116-137.
9. Fleming, P.S., Seehra, J., Polychronopoulou, A., Fedorowicz, Z, and Pandis, N. (2013) A PRISMA assessment of the reporting quality of systematic reviews in orthodontics. The Angle Orthodontist. 83, 158-163.
10. Balshem, H., et al. (2011). GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 64, 401-406.
11. Higgins, J.P., et al. (2011). The Cochrane Collaborations tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 343, d5928.
12. Guyatt, G.H., et al. (2011). GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence-inconsistency. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 64, 1294-1302.
13. Guyatt, G.H., et al. (2011). GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence-indirectness. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 64, 1303-1310.
14. Guyatt, G.H, et al. (2011). GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence-imprecision. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 64, 1283-1293.
15. Guyatt, G.H, et al. (2011). GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence-publication bias. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 64, 1277-1282.
16. Lau, J., Ioannidis, J.P, and Schmid, C.H. (1997). Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews. Annals of Internal Medicine. 127, 820-826.
17. Fleming, P.S., Seehra, J., Polychronopoulou, A., Fedorowicz, Z, and Pandis, N. (2013). Cochrane, and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in leading orthodontic journals: a quality paradigm? European Journal of Orthodontics. 35, 244-248.
18. Saltaji, H., Cummings, G.G., Armijo-Olivo, S., Major, M.P., Amin, M., Major, P.W., Hartling, L, and Flores-Mir, C. (2013) A descriptive analysis of oral health systematic reviews published 1991-2012: cross sectional study. PLoS One. 8, e74545.
19. Papageorgiou, S.N., Papadopoulos, M.A, and Athanasiou, A.E. (2014). Reporting characteristics of meta-Analyses in orthodontics: methodological assessment, and statistical recommendations. European Journal of Orthodontics. 36, 74-85.
20. Mills, E.J., Thorlund, K, and Ioannidis, J.P. (2013). Demystifying trial networks, and network meta-Analysis. BMJ. 346, f2914.
21. Efthimiou, O., Mavridis, D., Riley, R.D., Cipriani, A, and Salanti, G. (2014). Joint synthesis of multiple correlated outcomes in networks of interventions. Biostatistics, July 2, (Epub ahead of print
22. Pandis, N., Fleming, P.S., Spineli, L.M, and Salanti, G. (2014). Initial orthodontic alignment effectiveness with self-ligating, and conventional appliances: a network meta-Analysis in practice. American Journal of Orthodontics, and Dentofacial Orthopedics: Official Publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, Its Constituent Societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. 145, S152-S163.
23. Latthe, P.M., Foon, R, and Khan, K. (2008). Nonsurgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI): grading of evidence in systematic reviews. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics, and Gynaecology. 115, 435-444.
24. Fleming, P.S., Koletsi, D., Seehra, J, and Pandis, N. (2014). Systematic reviews published in higher impact clinical journals were of higher quality. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 67, 754-759.