Purpose: To evaluate the methodology and reporting quality of Chinese systematic reviews and meta analysis in oral medicine.
Methods: Chinese literatures of systematic reviews and meta analysis in oral medicine were searched in the CBM, VIP, WANFANG Database and CNKI from the establishment date to August 30, 2014. Two researchers screened and evaluated the data independently, and disagreements were resolved by discussion. Methodology and reporting quality of included literatures were evaluated by AMSTAR and PRISMA scale.
Results: Of the 204 literatures included in the analysis, the highest and lowest scores of methodology quality were 9 and 0, respectively. The average score was 4.95 ± 2.45. The main problems were insufficient in literature searching, absence of a list of included and excluded studies, lack of assessment for publication bias, etc. The highest and lowest scores of reporting quality were 21 and 4, and the average score of reporting quality was 14.07 ± 3.62. The main problems were incomplete report in abstract, data collection and analysis methods, bias control, conclusion, etc.
Conclusions: The methodological qualities of Chinese systematic reviews and meta analysis in oral medicine are generally low, and their reporting qualities are also needed to be improved.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
J Osteopath Med
January 2025
Arizona College of Osteopathic Medicine, Midwestern University, Glendale, AZ, USA.
Context: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has diverse applications across various clinical specialties, serving as an adjunct to clinical findings and as a tool for increasing the quality of patient care. Owing to its multifunctionality, a growing number of medical schools are increasingly incorporating POCUS training into their curriculum, some offering hands-on training during the first 2 years of didactics and others utilizing a longitudinal exposure model integrated into all 4 years of medical school education. Midwestern University Arizona College of Osteopathic Medicine (MWU-AZCOM) adopted a 4-year longitudinal approach to include POCUS education in 2017.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWound Repair Regen
January 2025
Research Unit for Plastic Surgery, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
The WOUND-Q is a patient-reported outcome measure for individuals with any type of chronic wound. This study aimed to identify patient and wound factors associated with the four WOUND-Q health-related quality of life (HRQL) scales: Life impact, Psychological, Sleep, and Social. Adults with a chronic wound were recruited internationally through clinical settings between August 2018 and May 2020, and through an online platform (i.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEClinicalMedicine
October 2024
Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Hum Reprod Open
November 2024
Department of Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Study Question: How accurately can artificial intelligence (AI) models predict sperm retrieval in non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) patients undergoing micro-testicular sperm extraction (m-TESE) surgery?
Summary Answer: AI predictive models hold significant promise in predicting successful sperm retrieval in NOA patients undergoing m-TESE, although limitations regarding variability of study designs, small sample sizes, and a lack of validation studies restrict the overall generalizability of studies in this area.
What Is Known Already: Previous studies have explored various predictors of successful sperm retrieval in m-TESE, including clinical and hormonal factors. However, no consistent predictive model has yet been established.
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the return to sports, return to competition, Tegner score and anterior cruciate ligament-return to sports injury (ACL-RSI) scores between patients who underwent ACL reconstruction (ACLR) combined with anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) and those who underwent ACLR alone.
Methods: Two independent reviewers conducted a literature search in PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library in July 2024, followed by data extraction and quality assessment. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta-analysis guidelines.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!