Department of Oral Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
J Clin Periodontol. 2013 May;40(5):542-52. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12096.
To perform a systematic critical appraisal of the methodological quality of systematic reviews on the effect of a history of periodontitis on dental implant loss.
MATERIALS & METHODS: PubMed, the Cochrane database for systematic reviews, the DARE, Biosis Preview, CINAHL, Web of Science, and LILACS electronic databases were searched on 16th June 2012, independently and in duplicate, for systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to dental implants for patients with and without a history of periodontitis. Manual searching of the reference lists of included papers was also conducted. The methodological quality of these systematic reviews was assessed by use of the AMSTAR and R-AMSTAR checklists. Before quality assessment was initiated, the reviewers were calibrated until they achieved excellent agreement.
Sixty-eight papers were initially retrieved. Of these, nine systematic reviews and three meta-analyses were included. Some domains, for example, "characteristics of the included studies" were satisfied in both checklists. In contrast, domains such as "comprehensive literature search" and "assessment of likelihood of publication bias" were rarely met.
Much methodological variability was encountered in the selected reviews. To furnish readers with a more comprehensive assessment of the evidence, authors should observe higher standards when conducting and reporting their reviews.
对牙周炎病史对牙种植体脱落影响的系统评价进行系统评价，以评估其方法学质量。
于 2012 年 6 月 16 日，独立并重复检索了 PubMed、Cochrane 系统评价数据库、DARE、Biosis Preview、CINAHL、Web of Science 和 LILACS 电子数据库，以查找有关牙周炎病史患者和无牙周炎病史患者牙种植体的系统评价和荟萃分析。还对纳入文献的参考文献进行了手工检索。使用 AMSTAR 和 R-AMSTAR 清单评估这些系统评价的方法学质量。在开始质量评估之前，对审稿人进行了校准，直到他们达到极好的一致性。
最初检索到 68 篇论文。其中，有 9 篇系统评价和 3 篇荟萃分析被纳入。在两个清单中，某些领域，如“纳入研究的特征”，都得到了满足。相比之下，“全面的文献检索”和“评估发表偏倚的可能性”等领域很少得到满足。
在所选综述中发现了很多方法学上的差异。为了向读者提供对证据更全面的评估，作者在进行和报告综述时应遵守更高的标准。
