Systematic reviews in oral health: a quality imperative
| Autor: | Zbys Fedorowicz, Helen V Worthington, Anirudha Agnihotry, Richard G. Stevenson, Eric W. Manheimer |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2016 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Medical education Evidence-based practice Scope (project management) business.industry Health Policy media_common.quotation_subject Alternative medicine MEDLINE Dentistry 030206 dentistry General Medicine Oral health 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Systematic review medicine Quality (business) 030212 general & internal medicine business Evidence-based dentistry media_common |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine. 9:47-52 |
| ISSN: | 1756-5391 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/jebm.12189 |
| Popis: | Systematic reviews must be conducted responsibly, eliminating any scope for error and bias. The reporting quality of a systematic review should follow and conform to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. AMSTAR (Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews) is an assessment tool, which has been developed specifically to assess the quality of the process used in conducting the review. There has been a significant increase in the number of systematic reviews in oral health and several reports have been published stating low AMSTAR ratings of systematic reviews in dentistry. Systematic reviews answer key clinical questions objectively, and are often used to underpin clinical guidelines in oral health. If the quality of these reviews is compromised, this can result in inadequate or inappropriate clinical guidelines. Consequently, ensuring consistent high quality is a key imperative for systematic reviews in oral health. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text