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
Number of systematic reviews included 54
Summary of Findings Only two included reviews were regarded as high quality.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes