Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.
Department of Orthodontics, Pediatric and Community Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.
Int Endod J. 2024 Oct;57(10):1422-1433. doi: 10.1111/iej.14114. Epub 2024 Jul 17.
In endodontics, the number of umbrella reviews has increased significantly over the last few years, but there is no evidence that they were methodologically sound. The aim of the current study was to appraise the methodological quality of umbrella reviews in endodontics, and to identify possible predictive factors associated with methodological quality.
Umbrella reviews published in the discipline of endodontics until December 2023 were included. The methodological quality of the reviews was evaluated using a checklist consisting of 11 items. Each item in the checklist was evaluated by two independent assessors who assigned a score of '1' if it was fully addressed, '0.5' if it was partially ddressed, and '0' if it was not addressed. Bootstrapped multiple linear regression analysis was used to examine the association between the total scores awarded and five predictor variables (a priori protocol registration, year of publication, number of authors, journal impact factor (IF) and continent of the corresponding author). The statistical significance level was set as 5%.
A total of 27 reviews were included. Ninety-six per cent of the reviews adequately reported: eligibility criteria for selecting the reviews, details of the reviews, techniques for assessing the risk of bias or methodological quality of the individual systematic reviews they included. Only 30% of the reviews adequately managed overlapping primary studies within individual systematic reviews. Among the five predictors analysed, a priori protocol registration and journals with IFs were associated with significantly greater total methodological quality scores.
Several methodological shortcomings in the umbrella reviews published within the field of endodontics were revealed. Umbrella reviews published in journals with IFs and those with protocols registered a priori had significantly superior methodological quality scores.
In endodontics, authors intending to publish umbrella reviews should consider the limitations revealed in this study and follow the appropriate rules to ensure their reviews comply with the highest standards and provide accurate and dependable information and conclusions.
在牙髓学领域，伞式综述的数量在过去几年中显著增加，但没有证据表明它们的方法学是合理的。本研究旨在评估牙髓学领域伞式综述的方法学质量，并确定与方法学质量相关的可能预测因素。
纳入截至 2023 年 12 月发表在牙髓学领域的伞式综述。使用包含 11 个项目的检查表评估综述的方法学质量。检查表中的每个项目均由两名独立评估员进行评估，如果完全解决，则赋值 1，如果部分解决，则赋值 0.5，如果未解决，则赋值 0。采用Bootstrapped 多元线性回归分析，考察总评分与五个预测变量（预先注册的方案、发表年份、作者数量、期刊影响因子（IF）和通讯作者所在的大陆）之间的关联。统计显著性水平设为 5%。
共纳入 27 篇综述。96%的综述充分报告了：选择综述的纳入标准、综述的详细信息、评估纳入的个体系统综述的偏倚风险或方法学质量的技术。只有 30%的综述充分管理了个体系统综述内的重叠原始研究。在分析的五个预测变量中，预先注册的方案和 IF 较高的期刊与总分显著较高的方法学质量评分相关。
在牙髓学领域发表的伞式综述中发现了一些方法学上的缺陷。发表在 IF 较高的期刊和预先注册方案的综述具有更高的方法学质量评分。
在牙髓学领域，打算发表伞式综述的作者应考虑到本研究揭示的局限性，并遵循适当的规则，以确保其综述符合最高标准，并提供准确和可靠的信息和结论。
