Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29097795›Full record

ArticleBritish dental journal2017

Cochrane and the COMET initiative: developing the evidence base in oral medicine.

J Taylor, T Walsh, H Worthington, P Brocklehurst, M N Pemberton, A M Glenny

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British dental journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

J TaylorOral Medicine Department, Glasgow Dental Hospital and School.
T WalshDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Oxford Rd., Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom.
H WorthingtonDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Oxford Rd., Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom.
P BrocklehurstNWORTH Clinical Trials Unit, Bangor, North Wales.
M N PembertonDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Oxford Rd., Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom.
A M GlennyDivision of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Oxford Rd., Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

All clinicians in medicine and dentistry aim to deliver evidence-based practice; however, it is widely recognised that the current evidence base for interventions in oral medicine, as with many other specialties, is of a low quality. The highest level of evidence is considered to be the systematic review and meta-analysis. The Cochrane Collaboration and the Cochrane Oral Health group produce high quality systematic reviews, however, despite the large number of trials carried out for treatments in oral medicine, the results are often not able to be utilised to guide clinical care due to the various methodological limitations of the trials including the heterogeneity of outcome measures used. To improve the strength of the evidence base this will need to change. The Comet initiative aims to support the development of core outcome sets which are used to allow homogeneity of outcome measures in trials and therefore will allow pooling of data for meta-analysis in future systematic reviews. This paper explores the complexities involved in producing evidence for oral medicine interventions and introduces an approach for developing core outcome sets in oral medicine.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based DentistryOral HealthEvidence-Based MedicineEvidence-Based PracticeMeta-Analysis as TopicOral MedicineOutcome Assessment, Health CareReview Literature as Topic

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.