Quality assessment of systematic reviews regarding the effectiveness of zygomatic implants: an overview of systematic reviews

Ref ID 240
First Author P. H. Sales
Journal MEDICINA ORAL, PATOLOGIA ORAL Y CIRUGIA BUCAL
Year Of Publishing 2020
URL https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32520920/
Keywords Protocols
Dentistry
Publication bias
Risk of bias
Pre-specification
Low reporting quality
Single reviewer
Problem(s) No registered or published protocol
Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria
Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
Single reviewer / lack of double checking
Individual study characteristics not reported sufficiently
Poor consideration of publication bias
Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed
Flawed risk of bias undertaken
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Number of systematic reviews included 7
Summary of Findings From 7 systematic reviews that assessed the effectiveness of zygomatic implants placed in atrophic maxillae. Six systematic reviews showed critically low methodological quality and one review was assessed as of low methodological quality using AMSTAR 2.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes