Abstract
To assess the methodological quality of published systematic reviews relating to all ceramic implant frameworks, abutments and restorations. Published systematic reviews relating to all ceramic implant restorations for single tooth and multiple teeth replacements were retrieved to assess their methodological qualities. Sixteen systematic reviews were included for methodological quality assessment by two independent assessors using AMSTAR-2 critical appraisal tool. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using the weighted Cohen's Kappa statistic. Most systematic reviews included randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized studies of intervention. The majority of included systematic reviews (15 out of 16) scored critically low on quality with more than one critical flaw when assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool. Most systematic reviews assessed lacked analysis of the effects of the risk of bias and heterogeneity of the included studies. The inter-rater agreement of the independent assessors was substantial (0.63). Confidence in the evidence presented in these systematic reviews was undermined by their tendency to overlook the effect of risk of bias and heterogeneity in evidence synthesis.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
