Critical appraisal of methodological quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analysis in Paediatric Dentistry journals

Jayaraman, Jayakumar; Nagendrababu, Venkateshbabu; Pulikkotil, Shaju Jacob; Innes, Nicola

doi:10.1111/ipd.12414

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Jayaraman y cols. 21 encontraron que los temas más tratados en las revisiones sistemáticas que evaluaron fueron: la prevención, los procedimientos restauradores, los procedimientos endodónticos pediátricos y la orientación conductual.…”

Section: Productividad Por Contenido Temáticounclassified

Pulpotomía en dentición primaria: un análisis bibliométrico de 57 años

Garza¹,

Menéndez²,

Llop³

2022

Rev. Odontopediatr. Latinoam.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introducción: La pulpotomía es el tratamiento pulpar más frecuentemente realizado en dentición primaria pero aún no se ha elaborado un análisis bibliométrico de la literatura científica publicada al respecto. Objetivo: Conocer el desarrollo de los artículos publicados sobre pulpotomía en dientes primarios desde 1960 hasta el 2017. Material y métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica electrónica incluyendo artículos en inglés, disponibles a texto completo en versión electrónica. Los indicadores bibliométricos analizados fueron: distribución cronológica de los documentos, productividad por revistas, por autores, por países, por instituciones, por tipo de artículo, por contenido temático, número de autores/artículo, número de citas recibidas/artículo y número de referencias bibliográficas empleadas/artículo. Resultados: Se incluyeron 204 artículos publicados en 39 revistas, sólo un tercio especializadas en odontopediatría. El 80,23% de los primeros firmantes estaba vinculado a una universidad. El número medio de autores/artículo fue de 2,85 de 30 países diferentes. El 50% de los trabajos fueron estudios clínicos no aleatorizados y el 82,84% buscó el mejor material para tratar la pulpa radicular remanente. Los países con mayor número de publicaciones fueron Estados Unidos (n=40) e India (n=38). Conclusiones: La producción de artículos sobre pulpotomía en dentición primaria y el número de revistas donde fueron publicados aumentó progresivamente en las décadas estudiadas, así como el número de autores firmantes. Predominaron los estudios clínicos buscando la mejor alternativa para tratar la pulpa remanente. El principal lugar de investigación fueron las universidades. Los paises emergentes han ganado protagonismo en la producción científica mundial sobre el tema analizado.

show abstract

Section: Productividad Por Contenido Temáticounclassified

Pulpotomía en dentición primaria: un análisis bibliométrico de 57 años

Garza¹,

Menéndez²,

Llop³

2022

Rev. Odontopediatr. Latinoam.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…9 Queen's University Belfast, Belfast BT7 1NN, UK. 10 University of Western Australia, Perth, WA 6009, Australia. 11 University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 4HR, UK.…”

Section: Acknowledgementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A study that evaluated 173 randomised trials published in Pediatric Dentistry found that the overall quality was "poor" with varied heterogeneity amongst published trials [9]. Similarly, evaluation of the quality of systematic reviews in Pediatric Dentistry found inadequacies in the reporting and identified areas for improvement [10]. In Pediatric Dentistry, various important information relevant to children's oral health has not been adequately reported [11].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reporting stAndards for research in PedIatric Dentistry (RAPID): an expert consensus-based statement

Jayaraman

Dhar

Donly³

et al. 2021

BMC Oral Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Reporting guidelines for different study designs are currently available to report studies with accuracy and transparency. There is a need to develop supplementary guideline items that are specific to areas within Pediatric Dentistry. This study aims to develop Reporting stAndards for research in PedIatric Dentistry (RAPID) guidelines using a pre-defined expert consensus-based Delphi process. Methods The development of the RAPID guidelines was based on the Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines. Following a comprehensive search of the literature, the Executive Group identified ten themes in Pediatric Dentistry and compiled a draft checklist of items under each theme. The themes were categorized as: General, Oral Medicine, Pathology and Radiology, Children with Special Health Care Needs, Sedation and Hospital Dentistry, Behavior Guidance, Dental Caries, Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Pulp Therapy, Traumatology, and Interceptive Orthodontics. A RAPID Delphi Group (RDG) was formed comprising of 69 members from 15 countries across six continents. Items were scored using a 9-point rating Likert scale. Items achieving a score of seven and above, marked by at least 70% of RDG members were accepted into the RAPID checklist items. Weighted mean scores were calculated for each item. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 and one-way ANOVA was used to calculate the difference in the weighted mean scores between the themes. Results The final RAPID checklist comprised of 128 items that were finalized and approved by the RDG members in the online consensus meeting. The percentage for high scores (scores 7 to 9) ranged from 69.57 to 100% for individual items. The overall weighted mean score of the final items ranged from 7.51 to 8.28 (out of 9) and the difference was statistically significant between the themes (p < 0.05). Conclusions The RAPID statement provides guidance to researchers, authors, reviewers and editors, to ensure that all elements relevant to particular studies are adequately reported.

show abstract

“…In a report on the quality of systematic reviews related to Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry trials, the quality of reporting was found to have improved over the years 41 . A wider review including different specialties within Dentistry (including paediatric) 42 highlighted the need to differentiate between reporting and methodological quality assessment. The authors suggested that the two concepts were often mistakenly employed within the dental literature interchangeably.…”

Section: Reporting According To Consort; Improving the Quality Of Repmentioning

confidence: 99%

A road map for designing and reporting clinical trials in paediatric dentistry

Araújo

Al-Yaseen

Innes

2020

Int J Paed Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Unless clinical trials are well‐designed, there is a risk that they will not be usable to improve patient care. Aim This paper discusses some factors important in designing clinical trials in paediatric dentistry. It uses the prevention and management of dental caries in children as the lens through which to look at these. Findings Amongst the factors to consider are clear research questions and objectives; appropriate outcomes and outcome measures; sample size calculation and the level of randomisation; methods for random allocation; and operator/assessor training. Experts in trial design including statisticians and a trialist should be consulted early in the design process. The aspects of trial design unique to cariology trials such as ‘clustering’ of data items, mixed dentition issues and those related to trials involving children (communication, consent etc) should be considered. Comprehensive reporting of trial results is essential. Conclusion There are many readily available resources and tools to help the researcher design a trial of good quality that will yield results useful to the research community and beyond, to those who will implement the findings and ultimately those who will benefit from them.

show abstract

Critical appraisal of methodological quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analysis in Paediatric Dentistry journals

Abstract: The quality of SRs and MA in leading Paediatric Dentistry journals were evaluated with AMSTAR tool and areas where quality could be improved were identified.

Cited by 15 publications

References 66 publications

Pulpotomía en dentición primaria: un análisis bibliométrico de 57 años

Pulpotomía en dentición primaria: un análisis bibliométrico de 57 años

Reporting stAndards for research in PedIatric Dentistry (RAPID): an expert consensus-based statement

A road map for designing and reporting clinical trials in paediatric dentistry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About