Systematic reviews in orthodontics: Impact of the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist on completeness of reporting

Vásquez-Cárdenas, Jenny; Zapata-Noreña, Óscar; Carvajal-Flórez, Álvaro; Barbosa-Liz, Diana María; Giannakopoulos, Nikolaos Nikitas; Faggion, Clóvis Mariano

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.05.009

Cited by 20 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 360 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Maticic et al, in the field of anaesthesiology, and Bigna et al, in the field of general medicine, reported poor or no improvement after checklist publication [17]. In agreement with our results, other authors in different fields of medicine and dentistry reported how information about registration is often missing in SRs´abstracts [13][14][15][16]18]. The lack of registration reports is surprising, especially in the SRs published after 2013, taking into account the wide acceptance of registration databases such as PROSPERO, which from its launch in 2011 to 2017 registered more than 30,000 SRs [19].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…According to our findings, a higher number of authors is related to a better quality report, and the same result was also highlighted by previous research [ 13 , 14 , 16 , 18 ]. In contrast, Bigna et al (2016), in top-rated medical journals, reported no association between the number of authors and the quality of the report [ 20 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…The present study provided analyses of a larger data pool compared to previous investigations in the same branch of dentistry. A similar article was recently published in Orthodontics, including 389 abstracts [ 14 ] of SRs on intervention and non-intervention procedures. The PRISMA-A checklist was designed with a special focus on systematic reviews of evaluations of interventions in which one or more meta-analyses were conducted [ 8 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other authors in different fields of dentistry also considered compliance with the guidelines to be poor [ 14 , 15 ]. Faggion et al in 2013 suggested how the authors of SRs with meta-analyses should improve the report of the limitations of evidence, the risk of bias, and the measures of heterogeneity among the included primary studies to enable the readers to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the findings and allow for better clinical application of the evidence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

There is still room for improvement in the completeness of abstract reporting according to the PRISMA-A checklist: a cross-sectional study on systematic reviews in periodontology

Martin

Faustino

Almiñana

et al. 2021

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To evaluate the completeness of reporting abstracts of systematic reviews (SRs) before and after the publication of the PRISMA-A checklist in 2013 and to assess if an association exists between abstract characteristics and the completeness of reporting. Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted in the PubMed and Scopus databases in March 2020. The search focused on the SRs of evaluations of interventions published since 2002 in the field of periodontology. The abstracts of the selected SRs were divided into two groups before and after publication of the PRISMA-A checklist in 2013, and compliance with the 12 items reported in the checklist was evaluated by three calibrated evaluators. Results A set of 265 abstracts was included in the study. The total score before (mean score, 53.78%; 95% CI, 51.56–55.90%) and after (mean score, 56.88%; 95% CI, 55.39–58.44%) the publication of the PRISMA-A statement exhibited a statistically significant improvement (P = 0.012*). Nevertheless, only the checklist items included studies and synthesis of the results displayed a statistically significant change after guideline publication. The total PRISMA-A score was higher in the meta-analysis group and in articles authored by more than four authors. Conclusions The impact of the PRISMA-A was statistically significant, but the majority of the items did not improve after its introduction. The editors and referees of periodontal journals should promote adherence to the checklist to improve the quality of the reports and provide readers with better insight into the characteristics of published studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

There is still room for improvement in the completeness of abstract reporting according to the PRISMA-A checklist: a cross-sectional study on systematic reviews in periodontology

Martin

Faustino

Almiñana

et al. 2021

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The quantity and quality of systematic reviews in Orthodontics have increased in recent years [17]. However, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to elucidate the effects of LLLT on OMI stability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of low-level laser therapy on the orthodontic mini-implants stability: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effects of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on the orthodontic mini-implants (OMI) stability. Materials and methods An unrestricted electronic database search in PubMed, Science Direct, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov and a hand search were performed up to December 2020. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or non-randomized clinical trials (Non-RCTs) that assessed the effects of LLLT on the OMI stability were included. Data regarding the general information, LLLT characteristics, and outcomes were extracted. The authors performed risk of bias assessment with Cochrane Collaboration’s or ROBINS-I tool. Meta-analysis was also conducted. Results Five RCTs and one Non-RCT were included and 108 patients were evaluated. The LLLT characteristics presented different wavelength, power, energy density, irradiation time, and protocol duration. Five RCTs had a low risk of selection bias. Two RCTs had a low risk of performance and detection bias. All RCTs had a low risk of attrition bias, reporting bias and other bias. The Non-RCT presented a low risk of bias for all criteria, except for the bias in selection of participants. The meta-analysis revealed that LLLT significantly increased the OMI stability (p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.67) and the highest clinical benefit was showed after 1 (p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.75), 2 (p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.21), and 3 (p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.51) months of OMI placement. Conclusions LLLT shows positive effects on the OMI stability.

show abstract

Is urban resilience a phenomenon on the rise? A systematic literature review for the years 2019 and 2020 using textometry

Bueno

Bañuls

Gallego

2021

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic reviews in orthodontics: Impact of the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist on completeness of reporting

Cited by 20 publications

References 360 publications

There is still room for improvement in the completeness of abstract reporting according to the PRISMA-A checklist: a cross-sectional study on systematic reviews in periodontology

There is still room for improvement in the completeness of abstract reporting according to the PRISMA-A checklist: a cross-sectional study on systematic reviews in periodontology

Effects of low-level laser therapy on the orthodontic mini-implants stability: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Is urban resilience a phenomenon on the rise? A systematic literature review for the years 2019 and 2020 using textometry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About