scholarly journals Time relevance, citation of reporting guidelines, and breadth of literature search in systematic reviews in orthodontics

2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Livas ◽  
N. Pandis ◽  
Y. Ren
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Reporting Guidelines

scholarly journals Obesity and Periodontal Disease: A Narrative Review on Current Evidence and Putative Molecular Links

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 526-536
Author(s):  
Federica Di Spirito ◽  
Ludovico Sbordone ◽  
Vincenzo Pilone ◽  
Francesco D’Ambrosio
Keyword(s):  
Periodontal Disease ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Indirect Evidence ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Clinical Criteria ◽  
Comparison Of The Results

Background: Obesity represents one of the main health problems worldwide and is considered a risk factor for several diseases, including periodontitis, which is a microbially-associated inflammatory disease affecting the tooth-supporting structures. Objective: The aim of this review was to report the current direct and indirect evidence concerning the possible association between obesity and periodontitis and their putative molecular links. Methods: A literature search was conducted between January 1999 and September 2019, in PubMed/MEDLINE and Science Direct databases, using pertinent keyword combined by Boolean operators. Through a multi-step screening process (literature search; articles title and abstract evaluation and full-text reading), studies fitting inclusion/exclusion criteria were considered for the review. Results: 35 studies were included in the present review (17 observational studies; 7 systematic reviews; 11 systematic reviews with meta-analysis), focusing on the direct and indirect evidence of the possible association between obesity and periodontitis and their potential etiopathogenic molecular links Conclusion: Although the majority of the studies reported a positive association between obesity and periodontitis, the heterogeneity of the classification criteria and of the clinical parameters employed in the studies for both obesity and periodontitis evaluation, complicated the comparison of the results, thus considered inconclusive. Although several putative molecular pathogenic links between obesity and periodontitis have been highlighted, further studies, with longer follow-ups and with homogeneous clinical criteria, are needed to better understand the putative relation between obesity and periodontal disease.

External Validity: The Next Step for Systematic Reviews?

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 283-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah A. Avellar ◽  
Jaime Thomas ◽  
Rebecca Kleinman ◽  
Emily Sama-Miller ◽  
Sara E. Woodruff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
External Validity ◽  
Home Visiting ◽  
Evaluation Research ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Reporting Guidelines ◽  
Sample Characteristics ◽  
Statistical Representativeness

Background: Systematic reviews—which identify, assess, and summarize existing research—are usually designed to determine whether research shows that an intervention has evidence of effectiveness, rather than whether an intervention will work under different circumstances. The reviews typically focus on the internal validity of the research and do not consistently incorporate information on external validity into their conclusions. Objectives: In this article, we focus on how systematic reviews address external validity. Methods: We conducted a brief scan of 19 systematic reviews and a more in-depth examination of information presented in a systematic review of home visiting research. Results: We found that many reviews do not provide information on generalizability, such as statistical representativeness, but focus on factors likely to increase heterogeneity (e.g., numbers of studies or settings) and report on context. The latter may help users decide whether the research characteristics—such as sample demographics or settings—are similar to their own. However, we found that differences in reporting, such as which variables are included and how they are measured, make it difficult to summarize across studies or make basic determinations of sample characteristics, such as whether the majority of a sample was unemployed or married. Conclusion: Evaluation research and systematic reviews would benefit from reporting guidelines for external validity to ensure that key information is reported across studies.

Biomedical conferences’ author instructions rarely mention guidelines for reporting abstracts of trials and systematic reviews

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-91
Author(s):  
Lenko Saric ◽  
Svjetlana Dosenovic ◽  
Jakov Mihanovic ◽  
Livia Puljak
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Reporting Guidelines ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

Aim: To analyze whether instructions for authors of biomedical conference abstracts mention guidelines for writing randomized controlled trial and systematic review abstracts and to evaluate reasons for their absence from instructions. Materials & methods: We analyzed instructions for authors of biomedical conferences advertized in 2019 and assessed whether they mentioned Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Abstracts and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Abstracts guidelines. We surveyed contact persons from abstract/publication committees of selected conferences to analyze why relevant guidelines were missing. Results: Instructions for abstracts were available for 819 conferences. Only two (0.2%) had reporting instructions for randomized controlled trial/systematic review authors. Almost half of the contacted conference organizers whose response we received were not aware of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Abstracts and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Abstracts guidelines. Conclusion: Conference organizers do not require and are not familiar enough with reporting guidelines.

Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses

2018 ◽  
Vol 157 (04) ◽  
pp. 392-399
Author(s):  
Sebastian Scheidt ◽  
Patrick Vavken ◽  
Cornelius Jacobs ◽  
Sebastian Koob ◽  
Davide Cucchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Systematic Literature Search ◽  
Meta Analyses

AbstractThe rising number of medical publications makes it difficult to keep up-to-date on scientific knowledge. In recent years, reviews in the form of narrative or systematic publications and meta-analyses have increased. These can only be interpreted and evaluated if the reader understands the techniques used. This review article describes the differences between narrative and systematic reviews, together with the characteristics of meta-analysis, and discusses their interpretation. The concept of systematic reviews and meta-analysis includes a systematic literature search and summary, together with an appraisal of the quality of the publications. Systematic reviews are often considered to be original studies due to their structure and ability to reduce bias.

Are the Physical Activity Parenting Practices Reported by US and Canadian Parents Captured in Currently Published Instruments?

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. 1070-1078 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise C. Mâsse ◽  
Teresia M. O’Connor ◽  
Andrew W. Tu ◽  
Allison W. Watts ◽  
Mark R. Beauchamp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Parenting Practices ◽  
Autonomy Support ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Coding Scheme ◽  
Stratified Sample

Background:The purpose of this study was to compare the physical activity parenting practices (PAPPs) parents report using with the PAPPs incorporated in the published literature.Methods:PAPPs in the literature were identified by reviewing the content of 74 published PAPP measures obtained from current systematic reviews supplemented with a literature search. The types of PAPPs used by parents were identified by surveying a stratified sample of 134 Canadian and US parents of 5- to 12 year-old children. Items from the literature and parent responses were coded using the same coding scheme. Differences between the PAPPs emphasized by the parents and the literature were examined.Results:Parents significantly emphasized different issues than what is measured in the literature (P < .001). Parents emphasized more control (13.6% vs. 6.9%), modeling and teaching (13.2% vs. 9.2%), and structural strategies (32.2% vs. 28.6%) and less autonomy support (11.8% vs. 14.0%), logistical support (9.9% vs. 12.8%), and responsiveness strategies (19.3% vs. 28.5%).Conclusions:Physical activity practices most often employed by parents are not the ones emphasized in current measures. The extent to which putting more emphasis on the areas identified by parents will increase the predictive validity of the measures warrants further examination.

Optimal literature search for systematic reviews in surgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 403 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Käthe Goossen ◽  
Solveig Tenckhoff ◽  
Pascal Probst ◽  
Kathrin Grummich ◽  
André L. Mihaljevic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Literature Search

ADHD Research in Arab Countries: A Systematic Review of Literature

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (13) ◽  
pp. 1531-1545
Author(s):  
Jamal M. Alkhateeb ◽  
Muna S. Alhadidi
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Arab Countries ◽  
Social Aspects ◽  
Review Of Literature ◽  
Prevalence Studies ◽  
Education Resources ◽  
Information Center

Objective: No systematic reviews could be identified in the literature that address ADHD research in Arab countries. In an attempt to help fill this gap, this systematic review was undertaken. Method: An electronic literature search of ADHD studies carried out in Arab countries was done by using Google Scholar, PsycINFO, PubMed, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Arabpsynet. Results: The search yielded 58 studies (10 studies on psychoeducational and social aspects of ADHD, 26 prevalence studies and two reviews of epidemiology of ADHD, and 22 studies on risk factors and comorbidities in ADHD). Conclusion: Although there has been an increase in ADHD research in Arab countries in recent years, this research remains relatively sparse and used methods and procedures that limit the generalizability of the findings.

scholarly journals Definitions of segmental instability in the degenerative lumbar spine and validation of these definitions: a systematic review protocol article according to PRISMA-P 2015 statement

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Signe Forbech Elmose ◽  
Gustav Østerheden Andersen ◽  
Leah Yacat Carreon ◽  
Freyr Gauti Sigmundsson ◽  
Mikkel Østerheden Andersen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Diagnostic Imaging ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Data Synthesis ◽  
Segmental Instability ◽  
Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

Abstract Background The concept of segmental lumbar spine instability is controversial with varying definitions. However, suspicion of instability is used as an indication for vertebral fusion surgery in patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. The objectives of this systematic review are to describe, the definitions of segmental instability in the degenerative lumbar spine, in studies of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and/or lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis, involving diagnostic imaging. And to describe which of the measurable radiological variables used to define instability have been validated against dynamic flexion-extension radiographs. Method Systematic review conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Systematic literature search will be conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, supplemented by search in Cochrane Library. International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov will be searched for ongoing or recently completed trials. PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) will be searched before initiating this review. In addition, a gray literature search will be conducted. Studies eligible for inclusion are clinical and biomechanical studies on adult patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis and surgical treatment hereof, studies involving diagnostic imaging. We will include studies giving a definition or describing patho-anatomical findings of segmental instability or any synonym or antonym hereof. Two reviewers will independently screen articles, involving a third reviewer as referee. Screening process and data extraction conducted using Covidence software. Data synthesis presented in results checklist and systematic narrative synthesis. Data synthesis on secondary objective by contingency table. Discussion With this systematic review we want to contribute to evidence based treatment planning of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. We also aim to present our result in a comprehensive manner, to encourage consensus regarding the definition of segmental instability. Registration This protocol was submitted to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 29. April 2020, submission ID: 182827

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document