Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
Publication Bias in Epidemiological Studies of Malocclusions in Mexican Children and Teenagers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Argueta-Figueroa Liliana, Quiroz-Carlín Karina Alejandra, Bautista-Hernández Mario Alberto, Torres-Rosas Rafael, Castro-Gutiérrez María Eugenia Marcela, Pérez-Cervera Yobana, Moreno-Rodríguez Adriana, Acevedo-Mascarúa Alfonso Enrique, Martínez-Martínez Enrique Antonio
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the publication bias of the reported prevalence of malocclusions in Mexican children and adolescents.
BACKGROUND: Publication bias determination is crucial in a systematic review, helping to ensure the conclusions' validity and reliability. Nevertheless, without accurate knowledge of disease prevalence and patterns, the health system risks inefficiency, inequity, and failure to meet the population's needs. On the other hand, malocclusions can impair proper chewing efficiency, contributing to digestive alterations, and nutritional deficiencies among other functional, psychological, and social problems. The data of the prevalence of malocclusion is imperative to implement early interventions in health services that prevent more severe skeletal discrepancies and reduce the need for invasive treatments in adolescence or adulthood.
METHODS: Studies were collected from five databases, following the PRISMA and Cochrane guidelines for systematic reviews. Eligibility criteria were full-text research in which the prevalence of malocclusions was reported. The risk of bias (Hoy tool), publication bias (the Doi plot and the Luis Furuya-Kanamori (LFK) index), and quality assessments (GRADE tool) were performed. The data were combined using a random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS: The result of the meta-analysis suggests a high prevalence of malocclusions in mixed dentition was 50.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 38.9-61.5%). However, the studies showed a risk of bias and publication bias.
CONCLUSIONS: In Mexico, there is a high prevalence of malocclusions among children and adolescents. However, these results are not robust enough to draw solid conclusions, due to the low certainty of the evidence.
BACKGROUND: Publication bias determination is crucial in a systematic review, helping to ensure the conclusions' validity and reliability. Nevertheless, without accurate knowledge of disease prevalence and patterns, the health system risks inefficiency, inequity, and failure to meet the population's needs. On the other hand, malocclusions can impair proper chewing efficiency, contributing to digestive alterations, and nutritional deficiencies among other functional, psychological, and social problems. The data of the prevalence of malocclusion is imperative to implement early interventions in health services that prevent more severe skeletal discrepancies and reduce the need for invasive treatments in adolescence or adulthood.
METHODS: Studies were collected from five databases, following the PRISMA and Cochrane guidelines for systematic reviews. Eligibility criteria were full-text research in which the prevalence of malocclusions was reported. The risk of bias (Hoy tool), publication bias (the Doi plot and the Luis Furuya-Kanamori (LFK) index), and quality assessments (GRADE tool) were performed. The data were combined using a random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS: The result of the meta-analysis suggests a high prevalence of malocclusions in mixed dentition was 50.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 38.9-61.5%). However, the studies showed a risk of bias and publication bias.
CONCLUSIONS: In Mexico, there is a high prevalence of malocclusions among children and adolescents. However, these results are not robust enough to draw solid conclusions, due to the low certainty of the evidence.