Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Jan;83(1):158-63.
doi: 10.2319/032612-251.1. Epub 2012 Jun 21.

A PRISMA assessment of the reporting quality of systematic reviews in orthodontics

Padhraig S Fleming  1 , Jadbinder Seehra, Argy Polychronopoulou, Zbys Fedorowicz, Nikolaos Pandis
Affiliations

A PRISMA assessment of the reporting quality of systematic reviews in orthodontics

Padhraig S Fleming et al. Angle Orthod. 2013 Jan.

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the reporting quality of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews (SR) in orthodontics and to compare the reporting quality (PRISMA score) with methodological quality (AMSTAR criteria).

Materials and methods: Systematic reviews (n = 109) published between January 2000 and July 2011 in five leading orthodontic journals were identified and included. The quality of reporting of the included reviews was assessed by two authors in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Each article was assigned a cumulative grade based on fulfillment of the applicable criteria, and an overall percentage score was assigned. Descriptive statistics and simple and multiple linear regression analyses were undertaken.

Results: The mean overall PRISMA score was 64.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 62%-65%). The quality of reporting was considerably better in reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (P < .001) than in non-Cochrane reviews. Both multivariable and univariable analysis indicated that journal of publication and number of authors was significantly associated with the PRISMA score. The association between AMSTAR score and modified PRISMA score was also found to be highly statistically significant.

Conclusion: Compliance of orthodontic SRs published in orthodontic journals with PRISMA guidelines was deficient in several areas. The quality of reporting assessed using PRISMA guidelines was significantly better in orthodontic SRs published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Harrison JE, O'Brien KD, Worthington HV. Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(3):CD003452. - PubMed
    1. Flores-Mir C, Major MP, Major PW. Search and selection methodology of systematic reviews in orthodontics (2000–2004) Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130:214–217. - PubMed
    1. Major MP, Warren S, Flores-Mir C. Survey of systematic review authors in dentistry: challenges in methodology and reporting. J Dent Educ. 2009;73:471–482. - PubMed
    1. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Lancet. 1999;354:1896–1900. - PubMed
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, for the PG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535. - PMC - PubMed