Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis for reporting quality of Chinese meta-analysis on stomtology
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1002-0098.2011.05.001
- VernacularTitle:用"系统评价和Meta分析报告规范"评价口腔医学领域中文Meta分析的报告质量
- Author:
Chun-Jie LI
1
;
Jun L(U)
;
Nai-Chuan SU
;
Sha LI
;
Zong-Dao SHI
Author Information
1. 四川大学华西口腔医学院
- Keywords:
Evidence-based medicine;
Meta-analysis;
Quality control
- From:
Chinese Journal of Stomatology
2011;46(5):257-262
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To determine the current status and influence hctors of reporting quality of the Chinese meta-analysis on stomatology.Methods A comprehensive electronic search was carried out through Chinese BioMedical Literature Database(CBM),VIP Databage for Chinese Technical Periodicals (VIP)and China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI)and a hand searching was also performed through 19 stomatologieal journals in Chinese to identify meta-analysis on stomatology.Two reviewers took responsibility for study inclusion,data extraction and reporting quality assessment with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis(PRISMA)in duplicate and any disagreement was resolved by discussion.Results A total of 34 meta-analysis on stomatology were eligible,most of them were ou oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery,and mainly focusing on etiology,prevention and treatment of oral diseases.The number of the meta-analysis increased during recent years.Reporting quality of the meta-analysis was not hish and the PRISMA scored(13.6±4.2).The main factors that influenced the reporting quality of meta-analysis were published on evidence-based medicine journals(adjusted β=0.53,t=4.15,showed that this outcome was stable.Conclusions Reposing quality of the Chinese meta-analysis on stomatology is low.To provide sufficient evidence to the clinicians and promote the development of evidencebased dentistry in China,experts on stomatology should study the knowledge of evidence-based medicine and comply with PRISMA statement when producing the meta-analysis.
