Current pediatric reviews · 2026
Mapping Systematic Reviews on the Management of Dental Caries in Primary Teeth: A Meta-research.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Pascareli-Carlos Aline MaquinE, Reis Thais Marchezini, de Novaes Tatiane Fernandes, Montagner Anelise Fernandes, van de Sande Francoise Helene, Gimenez Thais, Raggio Daniela Procida, Tedesco Tamara Kerber
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews (SRs) represent the most robust source of evidence for informing decision-making. While there are rigorous protocols for properly conducting SRs, sometimes the methodological biases in the primary studies are accounted for in the conclusions of the SRs.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to map the evidence regarding the management of caries lesions in primary teeth.
METHODS: Two reviewers conducted a systematic search up to March 2024 in electronic databases. Any SR concerning the management of caries lesions in primary teeth was considered eligible.
RESULTS: About 162 SRs were included. Among these, 80 focused on restorative treatments, 64 on endodontic treatments, and 18 on non-invasive treatments. Only 42.6% presented a study registration protocol. The majority (67.9%) performed a meta-analysis, while a minority exclusively carried out qualitative data analysis. Despite 92.6% of the SRs evaluating the methodological quality or risk of bias of the primary studies using some tool, only 24% assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach, resulting in classifications ranging from very low to moderate.
CONCLUSION: There is a limited adherence to study registration protocols, indicating a need for improvements in this practice. Additionally, among the few SRs that used the GRADE approach, the majority demonstrated levels of very low to moderate certainty.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to map the evidence regarding the management of caries lesions in primary teeth.
METHODS: Two reviewers conducted a systematic search up to March 2024 in electronic databases. Any SR concerning the management of caries lesions in primary teeth was considered eligible.
RESULTS: About 162 SRs were included. Among these, 80 focused on restorative treatments, 64 on endodontic treatments, and 18 on non-invasive treatments. Only 42.6% presented a study registration protocol. The majority (67.9%) performed a meta-analysis, while a minority exclusively carried out qualitative data analysis. Despite 92.6% of the SRs evaluating the methodological quality or risk of bias of the primary studies using some tool, only 24% assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach, resulting in classifications ranging from very low to moderate.
CONCLUSION: There is a limited adherence to study registration protocols, indicating a need for improvements in this practice. Additionally, among the few SRs that used the GRADE approach, the majority demonstrated levels of very low to moderate certainty.