Document Detail

Evidence-based oral and maxillofacial surgery.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  18423289     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
PURPOSE: The amount and quality of research evidence in oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) journals have never been evaluated. The current study aims to empirically assess the evidence available in this literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The main (Database 1) and neighboring (Database 2) journals of OMFS were manually screened over a 3-year period (2004 to 2006). The types and designs of articles were recorded. The identified randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) were further evaluated for issues of reported methodological quality. RESULTS: In total, 3,487 articles were analyzed. Meta-analyses and RCTs were very rare. Only 2 meta-analyses of RCTs were identified, and RCTs represented a mere 1.3% in each database. Case series and case reports were the dominant article types (1,388, or 59%, for Database 1; 686, or 60.1%, for Database 2). Basic research, laboratory and animal studies, had an important share of 19% and 15.4% in both databases, respectively. An equally high percentage was recorded for nonsystematic reviews, personal views, expert opinions, and editorials (15.9% and 19% for Database 1 and Database 2, respectively). Of the 46 identified RCTs, most of them enrolled less than 100 patients (37 studies, or 80.5%). The majority of them did not describe the randomization mode (27 studies, or 59%), did not present power calculations (31 studies, or 67.4%), and did not report allocation concealment (38 studies, or 79.5%). Almost half of them made no mention of masking (22 studies, or 48%), and only one third described withdrawals during follow-up (15 studies, or 32.6%). CONCLUSION: The OMFS literature suffers from a relative shortage of high-quality evidence. More, larger, adequately powered, and better reported RCTs are warranted.
Panayiotis A Kyzas
Related Documents :
19521999 - Surgical management of adult inferior turbinate hypertrophy: a systematic review of the...
19515229 - Divine intervention? a cochrane review on intercessory prayer gone beyond science and r...
18237349 - Updating reviews: the experience of the cochrane neonatal review group.
15932639 - A systematic review of intravenous gamma globulin for therapy of acute myocarditis.
15030779 - Using sonochemistry for the fabrication of nanomaterials.
20460949 - Vegetative state and minimally conscious state: a review of the therapeutic interventions.
3655199 - Fibrous dysplasia: a case report and literature review.
7772899 - A small pedunculated adenomatous polyp of the colon found to contain the focus of invas...
23375749 - Intratonsillar abscess: 3 case reports and a review of the literature.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Evaluation Studies; Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons     Volume:  66     ISSN:  1531-5053     ISO Abbreviation:  J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg.     Publication Date:  2008 May 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2008-04-21     Completed Date:  2008-05-05     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8206428     Medline TA:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  973-86     Citation Subset:  AIM; D; IM    
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ninewells Hospital, National Health System Tayside, Dundee, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Dental Research / standards*
Editorial Policies
Evidence-Based Medicine*
Journalism, Dental / standards*
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Periodicals as Topic / standards
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Surgery, Oral / standards*

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Quality of life evaluation of maxillomandibular advancement surgery for treatment of obstructive sle...
Next Document:  Mandible matrix necrosis in beagle dogs after 3 years of daily oral bisphosphonate treatment.