Performing Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

  • Alexandrina L. Dumitrescu


Health care professionals are increasingly required to base their practice on the best available evidence. After a literature search on a specific clinical question, many articles may be retrieved. The quality of the studies may be variable, and the individual studies might have produced conflicting results. It is therefore important that health care decisions are not based solely on one or two studies without account being taken of the whole range of research information available on that topic.

Systematic reviews have rapidly gained an important place in aiding clinical decision-making in medicine, although dentistry has been a little slower to adopt this approach. Systematic reviews are themselves considered a research activity, although the data are derived from primary studies in the area of interest rather than from direct experimentation.


  1. Akobeng AK. Understanding systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Arch Dis Child. 2005;90:845–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:663–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrew E, Eide H, Fuglerud P, et al. Publications on clinical trials with X-ray contrast media: differences in quality between journals and decades. Eur J Radiol. 1990;10:92–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Antczak AA, Tang J, Chalmers TC. Quality assessment of randomized control trials in dental research. II. Results: periodontal research. J Periodontal Res. 1986a;21:315–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Antczak AA, Tang J, Chalmers TC. Quality assessment of randomized control trials in dental research. I. Methods. J Periodontal Res. 1986b;21:305–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Armstrong EC. The well-built clinical question: the key to finding the best evidence efficiently. Wis Med J. 1999;98:25–8.Google Scholar
  7. Arrivé L, Renard R, Carrat F, et al. A scale of methodological quality for clinical studies of radiologic examinations. Radiology. 2000;217:69–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Balas EA, Austin SM, Ewigman BG, et al. Methods of randomized controlled clinical trials in health services research. Med Care. 1995;33:687–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barrowman NJ, Fang M, Sampson M, Moher D. Identifying null meta-analyses that are ripe for updating. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bassler D, Ferreira-Gonzalez I, Briel M, Cook DJ, Devereaux PJ, Heels-Ansdell D, Kirpalani H, Meade MO, Montori VM, Rozenberg A, Schünemann HJ, Guyatt GH. Systematic reviewers neglect bias that results from trials stopped early for benefit. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:869–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Baum ML, Anish DS, Chalmers TC, Sacks HS, Smith Jr H, Fagerstrom RM. A survey of clinical trials of antibiotic prophylaxis in colon surgery: evidence against further use of no-treatment controls. N Engl J Med. 1981;305:795–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bax L, Yu LM, Ikeda N, Moons KG. A systematic comparison of software dedicated to meta-analysis of causal studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50:1088–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Berchier CE, Slot DE, Van der Weijden GA. The efficacy of 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinse compared with 0.2% on plaque accumulation and periodontal parameters: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2010;37:829–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bergerhoff K, Ebrahim S, Paletta G. Do we need to consider ‘in process citations’ for search strategies? In: 12th Cochrane colloquium in Ottawa, Ontario; 2004. p. 126.Google Scholar
  16. Bergus GR, Emerson M. Family medicine residents do not ask better-formulated clinical questions as they advance in their training. Fam Med. 2005;37:486–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Berkey CS, Mosteller F, Lau J, Antman EM. Uncertainty of the time of first significance in random effects cumulative meta-analysis. Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:357–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bessa-Nogueira RV, Vasconcelos BC, Niederman R. The methodological quality of systematic reviews comparing temporomandibular joint disorder surgical and non-surgical treatment. BMC Oral Health. 2008;8:27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bickley SR, Glenny AM. The cochrane oral health group trials register: electronic searching and beyond. J Dent Educ. 2003;67:925–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Bickley SR, Harrison JE. How to…. find the evidence. J Orthod. 2003;30:72–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Bizzini M, Childs JD, Piva SR, Delitto A. Systematic review of the quality of randomized controlled trials for patellofemoral pain syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2003;33:4–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Boggess KA, Lieff S, Murtha AP, Moss K, Beck J, Offenbacher S. Maternal periodontal disease is associated with an increased risk for preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101:227–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Boillot A, El Halabi B, Batty GD, Rangé H, Czernichow S, Bouchard P. Education as a predictor of chronic periodontitis: a systematic review with meta-analysis population-based studies. PLoS One. 2011;6:e21508.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Booth A. Clear and present questions: formulating questions for evidence based practice. Library Hi Tech. 2006;24:355–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Bragge P. Asking good clinical research questions and choosing the right study design Injury. Injury. 2010;41S:S3–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Canakci V, Canakci CF, Canakci H, Canakci E, Cicek Y, Ingec M, Ozgoz M, Demir T, Dilsiz A, Yagiz H. Periodontal disease as a risk factor for pre-eclampsia: a case control study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;44:568–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Canakci V, Canakci CF, Yildirim A, Ingec M, Eltas A, Erturk A. Periodontal disease increases the risk of severe pre-eclampsia among pregnant women. J Clin Periodontol. 2007;34:639–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Castaldi JL, Bertin MS, Giménez F, Lede R. Periodontal disease: is it a risk factor for premature labor, low birth weight or preeclampsia? Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2006;19:253–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Chalmers IHR, Haynes B. Reporting, updating, and correcting systematic reviews of the effects of health care. BMJ. 1994;302:862–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Chalmers TC, Frank CS, Reitman D. Minimizing the three stages of publication bias. JAMA. 1990;263:1392–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Chalmers I, Enkin M, Keirse MJ. Preparing and updating systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health care. Milbank Q. 1993;71:411–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Chambrone L, Chambrone D, Lima LA, Chambrone LA. Predictors of tooth loss during long-term periodontal maintenance: a systematic review of observational studies. J Clin Periodontol. 2010a;37:675–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Chambrone L, Faggion Jr CM, Pannuti CM, Chambrone LA. Evidence-based periodontal plastic surgery: an assessment of quality of systematic reviews in the treatment of recession-type defects. J Clin Periodontol. 2010b;37:1110–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Chambrone L, Pannuti CM, Guglielmetti MR, Chambrone LA. Evidence grade associating periodontitis with preterm birth and/or low birth weight: II. A systematic review of randomized trials evaluating the effects of periodontal treatment. J Clin Periodontol. 2011;38:902–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Cho MK, Bero LA. Instruments for assessing the quality of drug studies published in the medical literature. JAMA. 1994;272:101–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Contreras A, Herrera JA, Soto JE, Arce RM, Jaramillo A, Botero JE. Periodontitis is associated with preeclampsia in pregnant women. J Periodontol. 2006;77:182–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions 4.2.5, Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. The Cochrane Library, Issue 3. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2005. [Updated May 2005].PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Dechartres A, Charles P, Hopewell S, Ravaud P, Altman DG. Reviews assessing the quality or the reporting of randomized controlled trials are increasing over time but raised questions about how quality is assessed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:136–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Delaney A, Bagshaw SM, Ferland A, Laupland K, Manns B, Doig C. The quality of reports of critical care meta-analyses in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: an independent appraisal. Crit Care Med. 2007;35:589–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Den Hartog L, Slater JJ, Vissink A, Meijer HJ, Raghoebar GM. Treatment outcome of immediate, early and conventional single-tooth implants in the aesthetic zone: a systematic review to survival, bone level, soft-tissue, aesthetics and patient satisfaction. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35:1073-86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O’Rourke K, et al. Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C. Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1994; 309(6964):1286–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52:377–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sullivan BM. EBP@NUHS Ch 2: asking a good clinical question using the structured PICO format. 2008:2.3.
  45. Egger M, Davey Smith G. Meta-analysis: potentials and promise. BMJ. 1997;315:1371–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Egger M, Smith GD, Sterne JA. Uses and abuses in meta-analysis. Clin Med. 2001;1:478–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Faggion CM Jr, Listl S, Giannakopoulos NN. The methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies in dentistry. Vet J. 2012;192:140–147.Google Scholar
  49. Faggion Jr CM, Schmitter M. Using the best available evidence to support clinical decisions in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25:960–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Farquhar C, Vail A. Pitfalls in systematic reviews. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;18:433–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Furlan AD, Brosseau L, Imamura M, Irvin E. Massage for low-back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;27:1896–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Garritty C, Tsertsvadze A, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Moher D. Updating systematic reviews: an international survey. PLoS One. 2010;5:e9914.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Gilbody SM, Song F, Eastwood AJ, Sutton A. The causes, consequences and detection of publication bias in psychiatry. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2000;102:241–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Glenny AM, Esposito M, Coulthard P, Worthington HV. The assessment of systematic reviews in dentistry. Eur J Oral Sci. 2003;111:85–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O, et al. Storylines of research in diffusion of innovation: a meta-narrative approach to systematic review. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61:417–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Greenhalgh T, Wong G, Westhorp G, Pawson R. Protocol – realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis: evolving standards (RAMESES). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11:115.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Haroon M, Phillips R. “There is nothing like looking, if you want to find something” – asking questions and searching for answers – the evidence based approach. Arch Dis Child Educ Pract Ed. 2010;95:34–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Haynes RB. Of studies, syntheses, synopses, summaries, and systems: the “5 S” evolution of information services for evidence-based healthcare decisions. Evid Based Med. 2006;11:162–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Herrera D, Sanz M, Jepsen S, Needleman I, Roldán S. A systematic review on the effect of systemic antimicrobials as an adjunct to scaling and root planing in periodontitis patients. J Clin Periodontol. 2002;29 Suppl 3:136-59; discussion 160–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Mea­suring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;237:557–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Higgins JPT, Altman DG. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from:
  62. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ. Chapter 7: Selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from:
  63. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from:
  64. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Lefebvre C, Scherer R. Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):MR000001.Google Scholar
  65. Horsley T, Dingwall O, Sampson M. Checking reference lists to find additional studies for systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(8):MR000026.Google Scholar
  66. Hujoel PP. Endpoints in periodontal trials: the need for an evidence-based research approach. Periodontol 2000. 2004;36:196–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Hujoel PP, DeRouen TA. A survey of endpoint characteristics in periodontal clinical trials published 1988–1992, and implications for future studies. J Clin Periodontol. 1995;22:397–407.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Imperiale TF, McCullough AJ. Do corticosteroids reduce mortality from alcoholic hepatitis? A meta-analysis of the randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:299–307.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Ioannidis JP, Lau J. Evolution of treatment effects over time: empirical insight from recursive cumulative metaanalyses. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:831–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Ioannidis JP, Contopolous-Ioannidis DG, Lau J. Recursive cumulative meta-analysis: a diagnostic for the evolution of total randomized evidence from group and individual patient data. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:281–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Jadad AR, McQuay HJ. Meta-analyses to evaluate analgesic interventions: a systematic qualitative review of their methodology. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:235–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:1–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Jadad AR, Cook DJ, Jones A, Klassen TP, Tugwell P, Moher M, Moher D. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals. JAMA. 1998;28:278–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Jeffcoat MK, Hauth JC, Geurs NC, Reddy MS, Cliver SP, Hodgkins PM, Goldenberg RL. Periodontal disease and preterm birth: results of a pilot intervention study. J Periodontol. 2003;74:1214–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Jeffcoat M, Parry S, Sammel M, Clothier B, Catlin A, Macones G. Periodontal infection and preterm birth: successful periodontal therapy reduces the risk of preterm birth. BJOG. 2011;118:250–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Jüni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282:1054–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001;323(7303):42–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Katrak P, Bialocerkowski AE, Massy-Westropp N, Kumar S, Grimmer KA. A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2004;4:22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Khader YS, Jibreal M, Al-Omiri M, Amarin Z. Lack of association between periodontal parameters and preeclampsia. J Periodontol. 2006;77:1681–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Koch GG, Paquette DW. Design principles and statistical considerations in periodontal clinical trials. Ann Periodontol. 1997;2:42–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Koretz RL. Methods of meta-analysis: an analysis. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2002;5:467–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Kunnen A, Blaauw J, van Doormaal JJ, van Pampus MG, van der Schans CP, Aarnoudse JG, van Winkelhoff AJ, Abbas F. Women with a recent history of early-onset pre-eclampsia have a worse periodontal condition. J Clin Periodontol. 2007;34:202–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Kunnen A, van Doormaal JJ, Abbas F, Aarnoudse JG, van Pampus MG, Faas MM. Periodontal disease and pre-eclampsia: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2010;37:1075–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Lang S, Kleijnen J. Quality assessment tools for observational studies: lack of consensus. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2010;8:247.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Larue EM, Draus P, Klem ML. A description of a web-based educational tool for understanding the PICO framework in evidence-based practice with a citation ranking system. Comput Inform Nurs. 2009;27:44–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Lau J, Antman EM, Jimenez-Silva J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. Cumulative meta-analysis of therapeutic trials for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1992;327:248–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Lau J, Schmid CH, Chalmers TC. Cumulative meta-analysis of clinical trials builds evidence for exemplary medical care. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:45–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Law M. Evidence-based rehabilitation: a guide to practice. Thoroughfare: Slack Inc; 2002.Google Scholar
  89. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. List T, Axelsson S. Management of TMD: evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37:430–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Lohsoonthorn V, Kungsadalpipob K, Chanchareonsook P, Limpongsanurak S, Vanichjakvong O, Sutdhibhisal S, Sookprome C, Wongkittikraiwan N, Kamolpornwijit W, Jantarasaengaram S, Manotaya S, Siwawej V, Barlow WE, Fitzpatrick AL, Williams MA. Maternal periodontal disease and risk of preeclampsia: a case–control study. Am J Hypertens. 2009;22:457–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Loos BG, Tjoa S. Host-derived diagnostic markers for periodontitis: do they exist in gingival crevice fluid? Periodontol 2000. 2005;39:53–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. López NJ, Smith PC, Gutierrez J. Periodontal therapy may reduce the risk of preterm low birth weight in women with periodontal disease: a randomized controlled trial. J Periodontol. 2002;73:911–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Lu CY. Observational studies: a review of study designs, challenges and strategies to reduce confounding. Int J Clin Pract. 2009;63:691–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2002;21:2313–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Lundh A, Knijnenburg SL, Jørgensen AW, van Dalen EC, Kremer LC. Quality of systematic reviews in pediatric oncology – a systematic review. Cancer Treat Rev. 2009;35:645–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Lutje V, MacLehose H, Garner P. Editorial strategy for revising Cochrane reviews: does it help? In: 13th Cochrane colloquium in Melbourne; 2005. p. 153.Google Scholar
  98. Macones GA, Parry S, Nelson DB, Strauss JF, Ludmir J, Cohen AW, Stamilio DM, Appleby D, Clothier B, Sammel MD, Jeffcoat M. Treatment of localized periodontal disease in pregnancy does not reduce the occurrence of preterm birth: results from the Periodontal Infections and Prematurity Study (PIPS). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202:147.e1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Maher CG, Sherrington C, Herbert RD, Moseley AM, Elkins M. Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys Ther. 2003;83:713–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. Manchikanti L, Benyamin RM, Helm S, Hirsch JA. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 3: systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials. Pain Physician. 2009;12:35–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Meurman JH, Furuholm J, Kaaja R, Rintamaki H, Tikkanen U. Oral health in women with pregnancy and delivery complications. Clin Oral Investig. 2006;10:96–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Michalowicz BS, Hodges JS, DiAngelis AJ, Lupo VR, Novak MJ, Ferguson JE, Buchanan W, Bofill J, Papapanou PN, Mitchell DA, Matseoane S, Tschida PA, OPT Study. Treatment of periodontal disease and the risk of preterm birth. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1885–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Miller SA, Miller G. Practice for emergency treatment of dental trauma: EB case report. J Evid Base Dent Pract. 2010;10:135–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Moher D, Tsertsvadze A. Systematic reviews: when is an update an update? Lancet. 2006;367:881–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16:62–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of reporting of meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999;354:1896–900.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Moher D, Tsertsvadze A, Tricco AC, Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Sampson M, Barrowman N. A systematic review identified few methods and strategies describing when and how to update systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(11):1095–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Moher D, Tsertsvadze A, Tricco AC, Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Sampson M, Barrowman N. When and how to update systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(1):MR000023.Google Scholar
  109. Moles DR, Needleman IG, Niederman R, Lau J. Introduction to cumulative meta-analysis in dentistry: lessons learned from undertaking a cumulative meta-analysis in periodontology. J Dent Res. 2005;84:345–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Montenegro R, Needleman I, Moles D, Tonetti M. Quality of RCTs in periodontology – a systematic review. J Dent Res. 2002;81:866–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Mullen B, Muerllereile P, Bryant B. Cumulative meta-analysis: a consideration of indicators of sufficiency and stability. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2001;27:1450–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Nabet C, Lelong N, Colombier ML, Sixou M, Musset AM, Goffinet F, Kaminski M. Maternal periodontitis and the causes of preterm birth: the case–control Epipap study. J Clin Periodontol. 2010;37:37–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National call to action to promote oral health in America: a report of the surgeon general. 2003. Available at: Accessed July 2011.
  114. Needleman IG. A guide to systematic reviews. J Clin Periodontol. 2002;29 Suppl 3:6–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Needleman I, Moles DR, Worthington H. Evidence-based periodontology, systematic reviews and research quality. Periodontol 2000. 2005;37:12–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Newnham JP, Newnham IA, Ball CM, Wright M, Pennell CE, Swain J, Doherty DA. Treatment of periodontal disease during pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1239–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Nguyen QV, Bezemer PD, Habets L, Prahl-Andersen B. A systematic review of the relationship between overjet size and traumatic dental injuries. Eur J Orthod. 1999;21:503–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Oettinger-Barak O, Barak S, Ohel G, Oettinger M, Kreutzer H, Peled M, Machtei EE. Severe pregnancy complication (preeclampsia) is associated with greater periodontal destruction. J Periodontol. 2005;76:134–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Offenbacher S, Lin D, Strauss R, McKaig R, Irving J, Barros SP, Moss K, Barrow DA, Hefti A, Beck JD. Effects of periodontal therapy during pregnancy on periodontal status, biologic parameters, and pregnancy outcomes: a pilot study. J Periodontol. 2006;77:2011–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Offenbacher S, Beck JD, Jared HL, Mauriello SM, Mendoza LC, Couper DJ, Stewart DD, Murtha AP, Cochran DL, Dudley DJ, Reddy MS, Geurs NC, Hauth JC, Maternal Oral Therapy to Reduce Obstetric Risk (MOTOR) Investigators. Effects of periodontal therapy on rate of preterm delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:551–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Oliveira AM, de Oliveira PA, Cota LO, Magalhães CS, Moreira AN, Costa FO. Periodontal therapy and risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Clin Oral Investig. 2010. doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0424-8.
  122. Olivo SA, Macedo LG, Gadotti IC, Fuentes J, Stanton T, Magee DJ. Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. Phys Ther. 2008;88(2):156–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:1271e8.Google Scholar
  124. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH, Singer J, Goldsmith CH, Hutchison BG, Milner RA, Streiner DL. Agreement among reviewers of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:91–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review – a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:21–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Pai M, McCulloch M, Gorman JD, Pai N, Enanoria W, Kennedy G, Tharyan P, Colford JM Jr. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: an illustrated, step-by-step guide. Natl Med J India. 2004;17:86–95.Google Scholar
  127. Pogue JM, Yusuf S. Cumulating evidence from randomized trials: utilizing sequential monitoring boundaries for cumulative meta-analysis. Control Clin Trials. 1997;18:580–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Paradis C. Bias in surgical research. Ann Surg. 2008;248:180–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Radnai M, Pál A, Novák T, Urbán E, Eller J, Gorzó I. Benefits of periodontal therapy when preterm birth threatens. J Dent Res. 2009;88:280–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Reisch JS, Tyson JE, Mize SG. Aid to the evaluation of therapeutic studies. Pediatrics. 1989;84:815–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. Richardson W, Wilson M, Nishikawa J, Hayward R. The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions. ACP J Club. 1995;123:A12–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. Ried K. Interpreting and understanding meta-analysis graphs – a practical guide. Aust Fam Physician. 2006;35:635–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. Rosenthal R. The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychol Bull. 1979;86:638–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH, Sykora K et al. Reader’s guide to critical appraisal of cohort studies: 1. Role and design. BMJ 2005;330:895–7.Google Scholar
  135. Sackett DL. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. Edinburgh/New York: Churchill Livingstone; 2000, xiv, 261.Google Scholar
  136. Sadatmansouri S, Sedighpoor N, Aghaloo M. Effects of periodontal treatment phase I on birth term and birth weight. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2006;24:23–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Salanti G, Higgins JP, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Stat Methods Med Res. 2008;17:279–301.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Salmos J, Gerbi ME, Braz R, Andrade ES, Vasconcelos BC, Bessa-Nogueira RV. Methodological quality of systematic reviews analyzing the use of laser therapy in restorative dentistry. Lasers Med Sci. 2010;25:127–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Sanderson S, Tatt ID, Higgins JP. Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36:666–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Santos CMC, Pimenta CAM, Nobre MRC. The PICO strategy for the research question construction and evidence search. Rev Latino-am Enfermagem. 2007;15:508–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Schardt C, Adams MB, Owens T, Keitz S, Fontelo P. Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007;7:16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Scherer S, Smith MB. Teaching evidence-based practice in academic and clinical settings. Cardiopulm Phys Ther. 2002;13:23.Google Scholar
  143. Shamliyan T, Kane RL, Dickinson S. A systematic review of tools used to assess the quality of observational studies that examine incidence or prevalence and risk factors for diseases. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:1061–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Shea B, Moher D, Graham I, Pham B, Tugwell P. A comparison of the quality of Cochrane reviews and systematic reviews published in paper-based journals. Eval Health Prof. 2002;25:116–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, Porter AC, Tugwell P, Moher D, Bouter LM. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Shetty M, Shetty PK, Ramesh A, Thomas B, Prabhu S, Rao A. Periodontal disease in pregnancy is a risk factor for preeclampsia. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89:718–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2007a;147:224–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  148. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Garritty C, Rader T, Moher D. Updating systematic reviews. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2007b. Report No.: 07–0087.Google Scholar
  149. Sindhu F, Carpenter L, Seers K. Development of a tool to rate the quality assessment of randomized controlled trials using a Delphi technique. J Adv Nurs. 1997;25:1262–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Siqueira FM, Cota LO, Costa JE, Haddad JP, Lana AM, Costa FO. Maternal periodontitis as a potential risk variable for preeclampsia: a case–control study. J Periodontol. 2008;79:207–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Smith LA, Oldman AD, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Teasing apart quality and validity in systematic reviews: an example from acupuncture trials in chronic neck and back pain. Pain. 2000;86:119–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Souza JP, Pileggi C, Cecatti JG. Assessment of funnel plot asymmetry and publication bias in reproductive health meta-analyses: an analytic survey. Reprod Health. 2007;4:3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Srinivas SK, Sammel MD, Stamilio DM, Clothier B, Jeffcoat MK, Parry S, Macones GA, Elovitz MA, Metlay J. Periodontal disease and adverse pregnancy outcomes: is there an association? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200:497.e1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000; 283:2008–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Suebnukarn S, Ngamboonsirisingh S, Rattanabanlang A. A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in endodontics. J Endod. 2010;36:602–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Tarannum F, Faizuddin M. Effect of periodontal therapy on pregnancy outcome in women affected by periodontitis. J Periodontol. 2007;78:2095–103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. The Cochrane Collaboration. Maintaining your review. The Cochrane Collaboration open learning material; 2002. Module 19.Google Scholar
  158. van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L, Editorial Board of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine. 2003;28:1290–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  159. Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, et al. Balneotherapy and quality assessment: interobserver reliability of the Maastricht criteria list and the need for blinded quality assessment. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998a;51:335–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, Kessels AG, Boers M, Bouter LM, et al. The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998b;51:1235–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, Tugwell P. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. University of Ottawa. 2001. Available at: Accessed 17 Oct 2011.
  162. West S, King V, Carey TS, Lohr KN, McKoy N, Sutton SF, Lux L. Systems to rate the strength of scientific evidence, evidence report, Technology Assessment No. 47. AHRQ Publication No. 02-E016. Rockville: Agency for Health Care Research and Quality; 2002.
  163. Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB; Hedges Team. Robustness of empirical search strategies for clinical content in MEDLINE. Proc AMIA Symp. 2002:904–8.
  164. Westbrook JI, Ampt A, Williamson M, Nguyen K, Kearney L. Methods for measuring the impact of health information technologies on clinicians’ patterns of work and communication. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2007;129(Pt 2):1083–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Woods BS, Hawkins N, Scott DA. Network meta-analysis on the log-hazard scale, combining count and hazard ratio statistics accounting for multi-arm trials: a tutorial. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Yates SL, Morley S, Eccleston C, de C Williams A. A scale for rating the quality of psychological trials for pain. Pain. 2005;117:314–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandrina L. Dumitrescu
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PeriodontologyUniversity of Tromsø Institute of Clinical DentistryTromsøNorway
  2. 2.Private practiceBucharestRomania

Personalised recommendations