Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2011 Aug;14(3):116-37. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2011.01522.x.
Systematic reviews (SRs) are published with an increasing rate in many fields of biomedical literature, including orthodontics. Although SRs should consolidate the evidence-based characteristics of contemporary orthodontic practice, doubts on the validity of their conclusions have been frequently expressed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the methodology and quality characteristics of orthodontic SRs as well as to assess their quality of reporting during the last years. Electronic databases were searched for SRs (without any meta-analytical data synthesis) in the field of orthodontics, indexed up to the start of 2010. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool was used for quality assessment of the included articles. Data were analyzed with Student's t-test, one-way ANOVA, and linear regression. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated to represent changes during the years in reporting of key items associated with quality. A total of 110 SRs were included in this evaluation. About half of the SRs (46.4%) were published in orthodontic journals, while few (5.5%) were updates of previously published reviews. Using the AMSTAR tool, thirty (27.3%) of the SRs were found to be of low quality, 63 (57.3%) of medium quality, and 17 (15.5%) of high quality. No significant trend for quality improvement was observed during the last years. The overall quality of orthodontic SRs may be considered as medium. Although the number of orthodontic SRs has increased over the last decade, their quality characteristics can be characterized as moderate.
系统评价（SRs）在许多生物医学文献领域，包括正畸学中，以越来越高的速度发表。尽管 SRs 应该巩固当代正畸实践的循证特征，但对其结论的有效性表示怀疑的情况时有发生。本研究旨在评估正畸 SRs 的方法学和质量特征，并评估其在过去几年中的报告质量。检索了截至 2010 年初发表的正畸领域的 SRs（没有任何 meta 分析数据综合）电子数据库。使用评估多个系统评价（AMSTAR）工具评估纳入文章的质量。使用 Student's t 检验、单因素方差分析和线性回归进行数据分析。计算风险比（RR）及其 95%置信区间，以代表与质量相关的关键项目报告的变化情况。本评价共纳入 110 篇 SRs。大约一半的 SRs（46.4%）发表在正畸期刊上，而少数（5.5%）是以前发表的综述的更新。使用 AMSTAR 工具，30 篇（27.3%）SRs 的质量被认为较低，63 篇（57.3%）为中等质量，17 篇（15.5%）为高质量。在过去几年中，没有观察到质量改善的显著趋势。正畸 SRs 的总体质量可被认为处于中等水平。尽管过去十年中正畸 SRs 的数量有所增加，但它们的质量特征可以被描述为中等。
