SynthesisEvidence-based dentistry2024
Assessment of the quality of guidelines on oral health care during pregnancy: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Evidence-based dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality Assessment of Guidelines on Tobacco Cessation: A Systematic Review.Tobacco use insights · 2025Review
- Dental Care in High-Risk Pregnancy: A Scoping Review.Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveImportance of oral health during pregnancy has been well reported. To prevent the occurrence of oral diseases and maintenance of oral health, a number of guidelines have been developed by different organizations. However, despite numerous efforts in development of these guidelines, a critical evaluation of the quality of guidelines has not been carried out. Thus, we aimed to perform a systematic review to assess the quality of guidelines on oral health care during pregnancy.
methodsPubMed, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Databases were electronically searched in March 2024. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included guidelines that were carried out within last 10 years and focused on oral health during pregnancy were included in this review. Guidelines focused for both oral health professionals and non-oral health professionals were included in this review. The assessment of the guidelines in this review was carried out using the AGREE II instrument. The four appraisers who carried out the assessment comprised of a gynecologists, a dental practioners, a public health expert and a dental public health professional. The instrument comprises of 23 key items within six domains and two additional global rating items.
resultsWe included eight guidelines in this review. The AGREE II showed two domains with mean score of more than 70% scores across the guidelines. A comparative evaluation of all the guidelines revealed consistently higher scores in scope and purpose (81.71 + 6.3) and clarity of presentation (71.61 + 11.7). Lowest mean scores were reported for editorial independence (47.87 + 7.21) followed by rigour of development (56.19 + 16.97), applicability (57.50 + 13.7) and stakeholder involvement domain (63.17 + 14.31).
conclusionAlthough many guidelines have demonstrated adherence to systematic methodologies, there still exists a scope of improvement in domains such as editorial independence, rigour of development, applicability and stakeholder involvement. Addressing these shortcomings is essential for promoting evidence-based oral health care practices and improving maternal and neonatal health outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39134686What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.