Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

Do authors of systematic reviews of epidemiological observational studies assess the methodologies of the included primary studies? An empirical examination of methodological tool use in the literature.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • المؤلفون: Kemper F;Kemper F; Faggion CM Jr; Faggion CM Jr
  • المصدر:
    BMC medical research methodology [BMC Med Res Methodol] 2024 Oct 08; Vol. 24 (1), pp. 233. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Oct 08.
  • نوع النشر :
    Journal Article
  • اللغة:
    English
  • معلومة اضافية
    • المصدر:
      Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 100968545 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1471-2288 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14712288 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BMC Med Res Methodol Subsets: MEDLINE
    • بيانات النشر:
      Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, [2001-
    • الموضوع:
    • نبذة مختصرة :
      Background: The procedures used to assess the methodological quality and risk of bias (RoB) of systematic reviews of observational dental studies have not been investigated. The purpose of this research was to examine the way that authors of systematic reviews of epidemiological observational studies published in dentistry conducted the methodological assessment of those primary studies. In the present article, we aimed to assess the characteristics and the level of reporting of tools used to assess the methodologies of these reviews.
      Methods: We searched Scopus and the Web of Science from their inceptions to June 2023 for systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies published in dentistry. Document selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate and independently by two authors. In a random sample of 10% of the systematic reviews, there was an agreement of more than 80% between the reviewers; data selection and extraction were conducted in the remaining 90% of the sample by one author. Data on the article and systematic review characteristics were extracted and recorded for descriptive reporting.
      Results: The search in the two databases resulted in the inclusion of 3,214 potential documents. After the elimination of duplicates and the application of the eligibility criteria, a total of 399 systematic reviews were identified and included. A total of 368 systematic reviews reported a methodological tool, of which 102 used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Additionally, 76 systematic reviews stated the use of a modified methodological tool. Information about the approach of assessing the methodological quality or RoB of primary studies but reporting no tool or tool name occurred in 25 reviews.
      Conclusions: The majority of authors of systematic reviews of epidemiological observational studies published in dentistry reported the tools used to assess the methodological quality or RoB of the included primary studies. Modifying existing tools to meet the individual characteristics of various studies should be considered.
      (© 2024. The Author(s).)
    • References:
      J Oral Biosci. 2021 Dec;63(4):337-350. (PMID: 34547454)
      Eur J Epidemiol. 2010 Sep;25(9):603-5. (PMID: 20652370)
      Dent Traumatol. 2018 Apr;34(2):71-86. (PMID: 29455471)
      Int J Epidemiol. 2007 Jun;36(3):666-76. (PMID: 17470488)
      Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Dec;126(6):2234-2242. (PMID: 20697313)
      Int J Paediatr Dent. 2020 Mar;30(2):144-155. (PMID: 31677307)
      Eur Heart J. 1995 May;16(5):588-602. (PMID: 7588889)
      Eur J Epidemiol. 2020 Jan;35(1):49-60. (PMID: 31720912)
      Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2020 Jun;21(2):115-122. (PMID: 32567942)
      JAMA. 2014 Jul;312(2):171-9. (PMID: 25005654)
      PLoS One. 2014 Jul 21;9(7):e102149. (PMID: 25048354)
      J Evid Based Med. 2023 Sep;16(3):261-263. (PMID: 37725482)
      Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2018 Jan-Feb;15(1):1-10. (PMID: 29497441)
      Mil Med Res. 2020 Feb 29;7(1):7. (PMID: 32111253)
      Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 18;155(8):529-36. (PMID: 22007046)
      BMJ. 2017 Sep 21;358:j4008. (PMID: 28935701)
      Head Face Med. 2020 Oct 6;16(1):22. (PMID: 33023617)
      Syst Rev. 2019 Nov 15;8(1):280. (PMID: 31730014)
      J Investig Clin Dent. 2019 Nov;10(4):e12459. (PMID: 31628734)
      Mol Oral Microbiol. 2023 Aug;38(4):259-274. (PMID: 37014754)
      PLoS Med. 2019 Feb 21;16(2):e1002742. (PMID: 30789892)
      BMJ Open. 2011 Feb 26;1(1):e000048. (PMID: 22021739)
      Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Nov;44(11):1405-10. (PMID: 26215383)
      J Dent. 2012 Jan;40(1):3-14. (PMID: 22019990)
      Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2016 Sep;13(5):387-395. (PMID: 27857763)
      Ann Intern Med. 1997 Mar 1;126(5):376-80. (PMID: 9054282)
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: Methods; Observational study; Study characteristics; Systematic review
    • الموضوع:
      Date Created: 20241008 Date Completed: 20241009 Latest Revision: 20241029
    • الموضوع:
      20241029
    • الرقم المعرف:
      PMC11459945
    • الرقم المعرف:
      10.1186/s12874-024-02349-5
    • الرقم المعرف:
      39379836