<i>Summing Up: The Science of Reviewing Research</i> Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1984, xiii+191 pp

Light, Richard J.; Pillemer, David B.

doi:10.3102/0013189x015008016

Cited by 323 publications

(389 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

365

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The overlap of selected studies between the review of Ripa [1989] and the present meta-analysis included 10 study results, apart from the fact that Ripa [1989] did not include gel brush studies using less than 1% fluoride and that one study [Olivier et al, 1992] was performed after the publication of the Ripa [1989] review. Light and Pillemer [1984] emphasize that the analysis of study outcomes has to be based on quantification and statistical processing of the available data. In contrast to the present meta-analysis, Ripa [1989] calculated the overall caries reduction by averaging the point estimates, without weighting the outcomes (PF) of the individual studies according to the power and without presenting a confidence interval.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Light and Pillemer [1984], the evaluation of study results has to be based on an objective selection of papers. Table 3 reveals a dissimilarity of selected studies between the present meta-analysis and the reviews as well as mutually between the reviews.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on the fact that the effect size is estimated more precisely as sample size increases, a plot of sample sizes according to effect sizes (PF) of the studies must show a funnel shape [Light and Pillemer, 1984]. Publication bias from underrepresentation of studies with non- Cobb et al [1980] 5.7 (2) 11-14 2 1.23% APF, tray, P 2 11.1 Hagan and Bawden [1985] 4.7 (2) 11-15 2 1.23% APF, tray, P 2 11.2 Hagan and Bawden [1985] 4.4 (2) 11-15 2 0.6% APF, tray P 2 12…”

Section: Publication Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A meta-analysis provides a more valid analysis of past investigations than the traditional review, due to a coherent selection of studies, the incorporation of sample sizes of the individual studies, statistical processing of the data including the exploration and quantification of background variables, and the assessment of potential bias [Light and Pillemer, 1984]. The purposes of this meta-analysis were: (1) to assess the overall caries-inhibiting effect of clinical fluoride gel treatment studies, based on explicit selection criteria, and (2) to explore factors potentially modifying the cariesinhibiting effect of fluoride gel treatment, concerning the baseline caries prevalence of the target population, the general fluoride regimen, and application features.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Studies on the Caries-Inhibiting Effect of Fluoride Gel treatment

Rijkom¹,

Truin²,

Hof³

1998

Caries Res

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A meta-analysis was performed on published data on the caries-inhibiting effect of fluoride gel treatment in 6- to 15-year-old children. The purposes of this meta-analysis were: (1) to calculate the overall caries-inhibiting effect of clinical fluoride gel treatment studies, based on explicit selection criteria, and (2) to explore factors potentially modifying the effect of fluoride gel treatment in caries prevention, concerning the baseline caries prevalence of the target population, the general fluoride regimen, and application features. The caries-inhibiting effect of fluoride gel application was assessed by the prevented fraction and the ‘number needed to treat’. The overal prevented fraction of the fluoride gel treatment studies, indicating the reduction of caries incidence by fluoride gel treatment relative to the incidence in the control group, was 22% (95% CI = 18–25%). Multiple regression analysis showed no significant influence on the prevented fractions for the variables ‘baseline caries prevalence’, ‘general fluoride regimen’, ‘application method’, and ‘application frequency’. The ‘number needed to treat’ (NNT), indicating the number of patients that need to be treated in order to prevent 1 DMFS, estimated the efficiency of fluoride gel treatment according to the caries incidence of the target population, including cost/effect relations. It was found that the NNT = 18 in a population with caries incidence 0.25 DMFS per year, and NNT = 3 in a population with caries incidence = 1.5 DMFS per year (treatment duration 1 year). From the standpoint of cost-effectiveness, the additional effect of fluoride gel treatment in current low and even moderate caries incidence child populations must be questioned.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Publication Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Studies on the Caries-Inhibiting Effect of Fluoride Gel treatment

Rijkom¹,

Truin²,

Hof³

1998

Caries Res

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For various approaches to metaanalysis, which is the application of quantitative methods for caDbining evidence from different studies, see Glass, McGaw, and smith (1981), Hedges and Olkin (1985), Hunter, Schmidt, and Jackson (1982), Light andPillemer (1984), andRosenthal (1984). When these metaanalyses were completed, a number of startling findings emerged.…”

Section: Validi1y Generalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity

Messick

1987

ETS Research Report Series

268

444

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Effectiveness and Risks of Bariatric Surgery

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Importance The prevalence of obesity and outcomes of bariatric surgery are well established. However, analyses of the surgery impact have not been updated and comprehensively investigated since 2003. Objective Up-to-date, comprehensive data and appropriate meta-analytic techniques were used to examine effectiveness and risks of bariatric surgery. Data Sources Literature searches of Medline, Embase, Scopus, Current Contents, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov between 2003 and 2012 were performed. Study Selection Exclusion criteria included publication of abstracts only, case reports, letters, comments, or reviews; animal studies; languages other than English; duplicate studies; no surgical intervention; and no population of interest. Inclusion criteria were at least one outcome of interest resulting from the studied surgery was reported – comorbidities, mortality, complications, reoperations, or weight loss. Of the 25,060 initially identified articles, 24,023 studies met the exclusion criteria, and 259 met the inclusion criteria. Data Extraction A review protocol was followed throughout. Three reviewers independently reviewed studies, abstracted data, and resolved disagreements by consensus. Studies were evaluated for quality. Results A total of 164 studies were included (37 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 127 observational studies). Analyses included 161,756 patients with mean age 45 years and body mass index (BMI) 46 kg/m2. We conducted random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses and meta-regression. In RCTs, ≤30 days mortality rate was 0.08% [95%CI, 0.01%–0.24%]; >30 days mortality rate was 0.31% [95%CI, 0.01%–0.75%]. BMI loss at the post-surgery five years was 12–17 kg/m2. The complication rate was 17% [95%CI, 11%–23%], and the reoperation rate was 7% [95%CI, 3%–12%]. Gastric bypass (GB) was more effective in weight loss but associated with more complications. Adjustable gastric banding (AGB) had lower mortality and complication rates; yet, the reoperation rate was higher and weight loss was less substantial than GB. Sleeve gastrectomy appeared to be more effective in weight loss than AGB and comparable to GB. Conclusions Bariatric surgery provides substantial and sustained effects on weight loss and ameliorates obesity-attributable comorbidities in the majority of bariatric patients, although risks of complication, reoperation, and death exist. Death rates were lower than those reported in previous meta-analyses.

show abstract

Summing Up: The Science of Reviewing Research Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1984, xiii+191 pp

Cited by 323 publications

References 0 publications

A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Studies on the Caries-Inhibiting Effect of Fluoride Gel treatment

A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Studies on the Caries-Inhibiting Effect of Fluoride Gel treatment

Validity

The Effectiveness and Risks of Bariatric Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About