- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed
- Critical appraisal of systematic reviews of intervention in dentistry published between 2019-2020 using the AMSTAR 2 tool
| Ref ID | 899 |
| First Author | P. Pauletto |
| Journal | EVIDENCE BASED DENTISTRY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
| URL | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41432-022-0802-5 |
| Keywords |
Protocols Dentistry Publication bias Risk of bias Pre-specification Disclosure Low reporting quality Non-Cochrane reviews Low methodological quality |
| Problem(s) |
Poor consideration of publication bias Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality No registered or published protocol |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 222 |
| Summary of Findings | From 222 included systematic reviews of interventions in dentistry indexed across Medline/PubMed from September 2019 to September 2020. Most of the systematic reviews showed critically low methodological quality (56.8%). The items least contemplated by the included reviews were about the justification of the study designs included in the review (3.6%) and the report on the sources of funding for the systematic reviews included in this study (9%). Furthermore, 47.8% of the systematic reviews did not report a protocol and 50.9% did not carry out an adequate investigation of publication bias. |
| 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 |