Faculty of Dentistry, University of Valparaiso, Valparaiso, Chile.
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Oral Health, Bioinformatics Research Unit, Riga Stradins University, Riga, Latvia.
Dent Traumatol. 2021 Apr;37(2):345-353. doi: 10.1111/edt.12630. Epub 2020 Dec 6.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The diagnosis and treatment of dental trauma are based primarily on observational evidence and case reports. The aim of this research is to assess the quality of reporting of case reports published from 2008 to 2018 in dental selected journals using the Care Report (CARE) guideline and to assess whether there was a change after publication of the CARE guidelines.
A descriptive study of the publications available on PubMed from specialist journals was conducted. Searches were made for MESh and free keywords associated with dental trauma and tooth injuries. One calibrated evaluator (kappa-intra = 0.87) using the CARE guidelines (max = 30 points) evaluated all case reports published from 2008 to 2018 in relevant journals. The average score before and after 2013 was compared by t-test and regression modeling, and the description of each CARE item was analyzed.
The search found 201 relevant articles published in Dent Traumatol 141 (70.1%), Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 10 (5.0%), Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 16 (8.0%), J Clin Pediatr Dent 19 (9.5%), and Pediatr Dent 15 (7.5%). The mean quality (± standard deviation) was 14.3 (±2.6), and range from 7 to 20. The number and mean (±SD) before the CARE guidelines were n = 171, mean = 14.3 (±2.6) and after the CARE guidelines were n = 30, mean = 14.7 (±2.7), (P = .39, t-test). No significant differences per journal or origin of the first author were found.
The reporting quality of case reports about dental trauma in five international dental journals has not improved since the publication of the CARE guidelines. The lack of reporting of essential items in case reports suggests that journals could enhance their quality by requiring authors to adhere to the CARE guidelines or similar reporting guidelines.
背景/目的：牙外伤的诊断和治疗主要基于观察性证据和病例报告。本研究旨在使用 CARE 报告指南评估 2008 年至 2018 年期间在选定牙科期刊上发表的病例报告的报告质量，并评估 CARE 指南发布后是否有变化。
对来自专科期刊的 PubMed 上的可用出版物进行描述性研究。使用 MESH 和与牙外伤和牙齿损伤相关的自由关键词进行搜索。一名经过校准的评估员（kappa-intra=0.87）使用 CARE 指南（最高分 30 分）评估了 2008 年至 2018 年期间在相关期刊上发表的所有病例报告。通过 t 检验和回归建模比较 2013 年前后的平均得分，并分析每个 CARE 项目的描述。
搜索发现，在 Dent Traumatol 141（70.1%）、Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 10（5.0%）、Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 16（8.0%）、J Clin Pediatr Dent 19（9.5%）和 Pediatr Dent 15（7.5%）上发表了 201 篇与牙外伤相关的文章。平均质量（±标准差）为 14.3（±2.6），范围为 7 至 20。在 CARE 指南之前，病例数量和平均值（±SD）分别为 n=171，平均值=14.3（±2.6），在 CARE 指南之后，病例数量和平均值（±SD）分别为 n=30，平均值=14.7（±2.7），（P=0.39，t 检验）。未发现按期刊或第一作者的原籍国划分的差异。
自 CARE 指南发布以来，五本国际牙科期刊上关于牙外伤的病例报告的报告质量并未提高。病例报告中缺乏对基本项目的报告表明，期刊可以通过要求作者遵守 CARE 指南或类似的报告指南来提高其质量。
