Methodological quality and outcome of systematic reviews reporting on orthopaedic treatment for class III malocclusion: Overview of systematic reviews

Journal of Orthodontics

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 102-120

  Jamilian, Abdolreza ^a   Cannavale, Rosangela ^a   Piancino, Maria Grazia ^a   Eslami, Sara ^a   Perillo, Letizia ^a  

^a ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

Author keywords

Class III malocclusion; Maxillary deficiency; Orthopaedic appliances; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

HUMAN; MALOCCLUSION; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; ORTHOPEDICS; REVERSE-PULL HEADGEAR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EXTRAORAL TRACTION APPLIANCES; HUMANS; MALOCCLUSION; MALOCCLUSION, ANGLE CLASS III; ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES; ORTHOPEDICS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84982238165     PISSN: 14653125     EISSN: 14653133     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14653125.2016.1155334     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Blackman NJ, Koval JJ. Interval estimation for Cohen’s kappa as a measure of agreement. Stat Med 2000; 19: 723-741.
2. Chatzoudi MI, Ioannidou-Marathiotou I, Papadopoulos MA. Clinical effectiveness of chin cup treatment for the management of Class III malocclusion in pre-pubertal patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prog Orthod 2014; 15: 720.
3. Cordasco G, Matarese G, Rustico L, Fastuca S, Caprioglio A, Lindauer SJ, et al. Efficacy of orthopedic treatment with protraction facemask on skeletal Class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthod Craniofac Res 2014; 17: 133-143.
4. Delaire J, Verdon P, Lumineau JP, Cherga-Negrea A, Talmant J, Boisson M. Some results of extra-oral tractions with front-chin rest in the orthodontic treatment of class 3 maxillomandibular malformations and of bony sequelae of cleft lip and palate. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac 1972; 73: 633-642.
5. Feng X, Li J, Li Y, Zhao Z, Zhao S,Wang J. Effectiveness of TAD-anchored maxillary protraction in late mixed dentition. Angle Orthod 2012; 82: 1107-1114.
6. Freire ADB, Nascimento Leagd, Lira Adlsd. Effects induced after the use of maxillary protraction appliances: a literature review. Dental Press J Orthodontics 2012; 17: 122-128.
7. Fudalej P, Dragan M, Wedrychowska-Szulc B. Prediction of the outcome of orthodontic treatment of Class III malocclusions—a systematic review. Eur J Orthod 2011; 33: 190-197.
8. Ghassemi M, Jamilian A, Becker JR, Modabber A, Fritz U, Ghassemi A. Softtissue changes associated with different surgical procedures for treating class III patients. J Orofac Orthop 2014; 75: 299-307.
9. Higgins JPT, Green S, (editors.). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
10. Jäger A, Braumann B, Kim C, Wahner S. Skeletal and dental effects of maxillary protraction in patients with angle class III malocclusion. A meta-analysis. J Orofac Orthop 2001; 62: 275-284.
11. Kanas RJ, Carapezza L, Kanas SJ. Treatment classification of Class III malocclusion. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2008; 33: 175-186.
12. Kim JH, Viana MA, Graber TM, Omerza FF, BeGole EA. The effectiveness of protraction face mask therapy: a meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 115: 675-685.
13. Kung J, Chiappelli F, Cajulis OO, Avezova R, Kossan G, Chew L, 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.
14. List T, Axelsson S. Management of TMD: evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37: 430-451.
15. Liu ZP, Li CJ, Hu HK, Chen JW, Li F, Zou SJ. Efficacy of short-term chincup therapy for mandibular growth retardation in Class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2011; 81: 162-168.
16. Major MP, Wong JK, Saltaji H, Major PW, Flores-Mir C. Skeletal anchored maxillary protraction for midface deficiency in children and early adolescents with Class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J World Feder Orthodont 2012; 1: e47-e54.
17. Maspero C, Galbiati G, Perillo L, Favero L, Giannini L. Orthopaedic treatment efficiency in skeletal Class III malocclusions in young patients: RME-face mask versus TSME. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2012; 13: 225-230.
18. Minami-Sugaya H, Lentini-Oliveira DA, Carvalho FR, Machado MA, Marzola C, Saconato H, et al. Treatments for adults with prominent lower front teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 5: CD006963.
19. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg 2010; 8: 336-341.
20. Morales-Fernandez M, Iglesias-Linares A, Yanez-Vico RM, Mendoza-Mendoza A, Solano-Reina E. Bone- and dentoalveolar-anchored dentofacial orthopedics for Class III malocclusion: new approaches, similar objectives?: a systematic review. Angle Orthod 2013; 83: 540-552.
21. Nordmann AJ, Kasenda B, Briel M. Meta-analyses: what they can and cannot do. Swiss Med Wkly 2012; 142: w13518.
22. Papageorgiou SN, Xavier GM, Cobourne MT. Basic study design influences the results of orthodontic clinical investigations. J Clin Epidemiol 2015; 68: 1512-1522.
23. Popovich I, Windsor B, Jordan V, Showell M, Shea B, Farquhar CM. Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of two different approaches. PLoS One 2012; 7: e50403.
24. Rogante M, Kairy D, Giacomozzi C, Grigioni M. A quality assessment of systematic reviews on telerehabilitation: what does the evidence tell us? Ann Ist Super Sanita 2015; 51: 11-18.
25. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development ofAMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007; 7: 10.
26. Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, Bouter LM, Kristjansson E, Grimshaw J, et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: 1013-1020.
27. Showkatbakhsh R, Jamilian A. A novel approach in treatment of maxillary deficiency by reverse chin cup. Int J Orthod Milwaukee 2010; 21: 27-31.
28. Sinclair PM. Orthodontic considerations in adult surgical orthodontic cases. Dent Clin North Am 1988; 32: 509-528.
29. Smith V, Devane D, Begley CM, Clarke M. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011; 11: 15.
30. Solano-Mendoza B, Iglesias-Linares A, Yanez-Vico RM, Mendoza-Mendoza A, Alió-Sanz JJ, Solano-Reina E. Maxillary protraction at early ages. The revolution of new bone anchorage appliances. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2012; 37: 219-229.
31. Toffol LD, Pavoni C, Baccetti T, Franchi L, Cozza P. Orthopedic treatment outcomes in Class III malocclusion. A systematic review. Angle Orthod 2008; 78: 561-573.
32. Turley PK. Managing the developing Class III malocclusion with palatal expansion and facemask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002; 122: 349-352.
33. Watkinson S, Harrison JE, Furness S, Worthington HV. Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 9: CD003451.
34. Yang X, Li C, Bai D, Su N, Chen T, Xu Y, et al. Treatment effectiveness of Fränkel function regulator on the Class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014; 146: 143-154.
35. Yepes E, Quintero P, Rueda ZV, Pedroza A. Optimal force for maxillary protraction facemask therapy in the early treatment of class III malocclusion. Eur J Orthod 2014; 36: 586-594