Clovis M Faggion1, Momen A Atieh, Stephanie Park. 1. Department of Oral Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand. clovisfaggion@yahoo.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To perform an overview of literature search strategies in systematic reviews (SRs) published in periodontology and implant dentistry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two electronic databases (PubMed and Cochrane Database of SRs) were searched, independently and in duplicate, for SRs with meta-analyses on interventions, with the last search performed on 11 November 2012. Manual searches of the reference lists of included SRs and 10 specialty dental journals were conducted. Methodological issues of the search strategies of included SRs were assessed with Cochrane collaboration guidelines and AMSTAR recommendations. The search strategies employed in Cochrane and paper-based SRs were compared. RESULTS: A total of 146 SRs with meta-analyses were included, including 19 Cochrane and 127 paper-based SRs. Some issues, such as "the use of keywords," were reported in most of the SRs (86%). Other issues, such as "search of grey literature" and "language restriction," were not fully reported (34% and 50% respectively). The quality of search strategy reporting in Cochrane SRs was better than that of paper-based SRs for seven of the eight criteria assessed. CONCLUSION: There is room for improving the quality of reporting of search strategies in SRs in periodontology and implant dentistry, particularly in SRs published in paper-based journals.
OBJECTIVE: To perform an overview of literature search strategies in systematic reviews (SRs) published in periodontology and implant dentistry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two electronic databases (PubMed and Cochrane Database of SRs) were searched, independently and in duplicate, for SRs with meta-analyses on interventions, with the last search performed on 11 November 2012. Manual searches of the reference lists of included SRs and 10 specialty dental journals were conducted. Methodological issues of the search strategies of included SRs were assessed with Cochrane collaboration guidelines and AMSTAR recommendations. The search strategies employed in Cochrane and paper-based SRs were compared. RESULTS: A total of 146 SRs with meta-analyses were included, including 19 Cochrane and 127 paper-based SRs. Some issues, such as "the use of keywords," were reported in most of the SRs (86%). Other issues, such as "search of grey literature" and "language restriction," were not fully reported (34% and 50% respectively). The quality of search strategy reporting in Cochrane SRs was better than that of paper-based SRs for seven of the eight criteria assessed. CONCLUSION: There is room for improving the quality of reporting of search strategies in SRs in periodontology and implant dentistry, particularly in SRs published in paper-based journals.
Authors: Pía López-Jornet; Francisco Parra Perrez; José Luis Calvo-Guirado; Irene Ros-Llor; Irene LLor-Ros; Piedad Ramírez-Fernández Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2014-03-29 Impact factor: 3.896