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 • Dentistry
• Pre-specification
• Risk of bias
• Low reporting quality
• Publication bias
• Protocols
• 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
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country Brazil
Checklists • AMSTAR 2
Aim To assess the methodological quality (AMSTAR 2) of systematic reviews that assessed the effectiveness of zygomatic implants placed in atrophic maxillae.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
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.
Number of systematic reviews included 7
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 701
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description