通过口腔医学系统评价进行证据合成的关键策略

Anirudha Agnihotry , Radhika Thakkar , Karanjot S Gill , Todd Schoenbaum , Maureen Dobbins , Richard G Stevenson , Rachel Couban , Sagnik Ray
{"title":"通过口腔医学系统评价进行证据合成的关键策略","authors":"Anirudha Agnihotry ,&nbsp;Radhika Thakkar ,&nbsp;Karanjot S Gill ,&nbsp;Todd Schoenbaum ,&nbsp;Maureen Dobbins ,&nbsp;Richard G Stevenson ,&nbsp;Rachel Couban ,&nbsp;Sagnik Ray","doi":"10.1016/j.dentre.2025.100152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Systematic reviews in dentistry are increasing in numbers and scope, influencing and informing the overall practice. Quality conduct of these reviews is indispensable. Key strategies should be followed to execute these effectively, starting with assembling the team with all the experts playing the right roles. Formulating the question and registering the review at a protocol registry are important aspects and it should be noted that the right search strategy is followed, where all the databases are thoroughly searched with the guidance from an information specialist. Critical appraisal of the quality of included studies should be performed with an objective tool after the included studies get the data extracted by two reviewers, getting conflicts resolved by a third one. Analyzed data should be schematically presented comprehensively in the results section and suitable conclusions should be drawn, often augmented with generating recommendations for the practice. Dissemination of the results and their implications on practice should be considered a crucial and pivotal part of the review process, as this serves the purpose of the research by creating the impact in the right domains.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100364,"journal":{"name":"Dentistry Review","volume":"5 1","pages":"Article 100152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Key strategies for evidence synthesis through systematic reviews in Dentistry\",\"authors\":\"Anirudha Agnihotry ,&nbsp;Radhika Thakkar ,&nbsp;Karanjot S Gill ,&nbsp;Todd Schoenbaum ,&nbsp;Maureen Dobbins ,&nbsp;Richard G Stevenson ,&nbsp;Rachel Couban ,&nbsp;Sagnik Ray\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.dentre.2025.100152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Systematic reviews in dentistry are increasing in numbers and scope, influencing and informing the overall practice. Quality conduct of these reviews is indispensable. Key strategies should be followed to execute these effectively, starting with assembling the team with all the experts playing the right roles. Formulating the question and registering the review at a protocol registry are important aspects and it should be noted that the right search strategy is followed, where all the databases are thoroughly searched with the guidance from an information specialist. Critical appraisal of the quality of included studies should be performed with an objective tool after the included studies get the data extracted by two reviewers, getting conflicts resolved by a third one. Analyzed data should be schematically presented comprehensively in the results section and suitable conclusions should be drawn, often augmented with generating recommendations for the practice. Dissemination of the results and their implications on practice should be considered a crucial and pivotal part of the review process, as this serves the purpose of the research by creating the impact in the right domains.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100364,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dentistry Review\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100152\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dentistry Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S277255962500001X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dentistry Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S277255962500001X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

牙科的系统审查在数量和范围上都在增加,影响和通知了整体实践。这些审查的质量管理是必不可少的。为了有效地执行这些策略,应该遵循关键策略,首先是组建团队,让所有的专家都扮演正确的角色。提出问题和在协议注册中心注册审查是重要的方面,应该注意的是,遵循正确的搜索策略,在信息专家的指导下彻底搜索所有数据库。在纳入的研究由两位审稿人提取数据后,应使用客观工具对纳入研究的质量进行批判性评价,并由第三位审稿人解决冲突。分析后的数据应该在结果部分以图解的方式全面呈现,并应得出适当的结论,通常还应增加对实践的建议。结果的传播及其对实践的影响应被视为审查过程的关键和关键部分,因为这通过在正确的领域产生影响来服务于研究的目的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Key strategies for evidence synthesis through systematic reviews in Dentistry

Key strategies for evidence synthesis through systematic reviews in Dentistry
Systematic reviews in dentistry are increasing in numbers and scope, influencing and informing the overall practice. Quality conduct of these reviews is indispensable. Key strategies should be followed to execute these effectively, starting with assembling the team with all the experts playing the right roles. Formulating the question and registering the review at a protocol registry are important aspects and it should be noted that the right search strategy is followed, where all the databases are thoroughly searched with the guidance from an information specialist. Critical appraisal of the quality of included studies should be performed with an objective tool after the included studies get the data extracted by two reviewers, getting conflicts resolved by a third one. Analyzed data should be schematically presented comprehensively in the results section and suitable conclusions should be drawn, often augmented with generating recommendations for the practice. Dissemination of the results and their implications on practice should be considered a crucial and pivotal part of the review process, as this serves the purpose of the research by creating the impact in the right domains.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信