The methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies in dentistry

Ref ID 631
First Author C. M. Faggion Jr
Journal THE VETERINARY JOURNAL
Year Of Publishing 2012
URL https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21924652/
Keywords • Dentistry
• Animal studies
• Risk of bias
• Low methodological quality
• Publication bias
• Grey literature
Problem(s) • Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review
• Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
• Grey literature excluded
• Poor execution of narrative synthesis
• Poor consideration of publication bias
• No quality assessment undertaken or reported
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country Germany
Checklists • AMSTAR 1
Aim To to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies in dentistry using AMSTAR
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings Only two included reviews were regarded as high quality.
Number of systematic reviews included 54
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 444
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description