Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30887462›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2019

Quality of abstract of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric dentistry journals.

S J Pulikkotil, J Jayaraman, V Nagendrababu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

3 authors.

S J PulikkotilDivision of Clinical Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
J JayaramanChildren's Dentistry and Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. jayakumar83@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1737-6891
V NagendrababuDivision of Clinical Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo systematically evaluate the reporting quality of the abstract of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric dentistry journals. MATERIALS AND

methodsSystematic reviews with meta-analyses in paediatric dentistry were searched in PubMed and Scopus databases from inception to December 2017. Selection of studies by title and abstract screening followed by full-text assessment was independently done by two reviewers. The quality of abstracts was assessed by PRISMA-Abstract checklist comprising of 12 items; one each for title and objective, three items for methods, three items for results, two items for discussion and two items for others. PRISMA-A median scores were calculated and compared with the article characteristics. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 and multi-variate analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis test.

resultsA total of 24 studies were included in the analysis. The mean PRISMA-Abstract score was 7.46 ± 1.19. None of the studies were of high quality (score 10-12), 20 were of moderate (score 7-9), and 4 were of low quality (score 1-6). Journals that adhered to PRISMA guidelines showed significantly higher quality (p < 0.05). No association was found between the quality and the number of authors, country, journals, year of publication, word count and focus of study.

conclusionMajority of abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric dentistry journals were of moderate quality. Adoption and adherence to PRISMA-Abstract checklist by the journal editors and authors will enhance the reporting quality of abstracts.

Indexed as

Abstracting and IndexingMeta-Analysis as TopicPediatric DentistryPeriodicals as TopicSystematic Reviews as TopicChecklistChildHumansPublishingResearch ReportAbstractMeta-analysisPaediatric dentistryPRISMA-abstractReporting qualitySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30887462

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.