Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials Published In Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery (MAOS) From 2009-2021 Using RoB-2.0 Tool

被引:0
作者
Kaur, Amanjot [1 ]
Bali, Rishi Kumar [2 ]
Patnana, Arun K. [3 ]
Gigi, P. G. [1 ]
Pandey, Akhilesh [1 ]
Aparna, Ganesan [1 ]
Chaudhry, Kirti [1 ]
机构
[1] All India Inst Med Sci, Dept Dent, Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
[2] DAV Dent Coll & MDM Gen Hosp, Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, Yamunanagar, Haryana, India
[3] All India Inst Med Sci, Dept Dent, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
关键词
Methodological quality; Risk of bias; Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery (MAOS); SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; ORTHOPEDICS; RCTS;
D O I
10.1007/s12663-022-01795-2
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Aim Analyzing quality of Randomized Controlled trials (RCTs) published in the Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery (MAOS) since inception using Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2.0. Methodology Three authors independently screened and evaluated the RCTs according to Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2.0 based on the exclusion and inclusion criteria. All six domains of the RoB 2.0 tool were analyzed. The assessment of each judgment can be "Low" or "High" risk of bias, or can express "Some concerns." Results "Some concerns" were found in the randomization process (57%), and "low ROB" was evaluated in the second domain (57%), third domain (96%) and fourth domain (53%).In fifth domain, maximum of the articles had shown either some concerns in ROB (49%) or low ROB (45%).Analysis of the overall ROB in the included articles, maximum of the articles (50%) of the articles had shown high ROB followed by articles with some concerns in the ROB assessment (36%) and only 14% of the included article shad shown the low ROB in the RCT methodology. Conclusion The methodological and reporting quality in MAOS journal has a significant room for improvement.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 7
页数:7
相关论文
共 26 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], RoB 2: A revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials | Cochrane Bias
  • [2] BIAS IN TREATMENT ASSIGNMENT IN CONTROLLED CLINICAL-TRIALS
    CHALMERS, TC
    CELANO, P
    SACKS, HS
    SMITH, H
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1983, 309 (22) : 1358 - 1361
  • [3] Charrois Theresa L, 2015, Can J Hosp Pharm, V68, P144
  • [4] Level of Evidence Analysis in Journal of Maxillofacial Oral Surgery: A Twelve-Year Bibliometric Analysis of 1300 Publications (2009-2020)
    Chaudhry, Kirti
    Bali, Rishi Kumar
    Kaur, Amanjot
    Tiwari, Rahul V. C.
    Patnana, Arun K.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAXILLOFACIAL & ORAL SURGERY, 2021, 20 (03) : 364 - 372
  • [5] Risk of bias of randomized controlled trials published in orthopaedic journals
    Chess, Laura E.
    Gagnier, Joel
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2013, 13
  • [6] Moraes Vinícius Ynoe de, 2010, Rev. bras. ortop., V45, P601, DOI 10.1016/S2255-4971(15)30310-4
  • [7] Dodwell E, 2015, J PEDIATR ORTHOPED, V35, P536, DOI 10.1097/BPO.0000000000000324
  • [8] A quality assessment of randomized clinical trials in pediatric orthopedics
    Dulai, Sukhdeep K.
    Slobogean, Bronwyn L. T.
    Beauchamp, Richard D.
    Mulpuri, Kishore
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC ORTHOPAEDICS, 2007, 27 (05) : 573 - 581
  • [9] Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias
    Dwan, Kerry
    Altman, Douglas G.
    Arnaiz, Juan A.
    Bloom, Jill
    Chan, An-Wen
    Cronin, Eugenia
    Decullier, Evelyne
    Easterbrook, Philippa J.
    Von Elm, Erik
    Gamble, Carrol
    Ghersi, Davina
    Ioannidis, John P. A.
    Simes, John
    Williamson, Paula R.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2008, 3 (08):
  • [10] Esposito M, 2001, INT J ORAL MAX IMPL, V16, P783