|C. M. Faggion
|JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY
|Year Of Publishing
Risk of bias
Low reporting quality
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
High risk of bias (ROBIS)
Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing
Flawed risk of bias undertaken
Single reviewer / lack of double checking
Spin or subjective interpretation of findings
|Number of systematic reviews included
|Summary of Findings
|High risk of bias was detected for most systematic reviews (n=25) using ROBIS, whilst five systematic reviews displayed low methodological quality by AMSTAR. Almost 30% of the RoB comparisons (for the same RCTs) had different RoB ratings across systematic reviews
|Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results?
|Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?