Abstract
Number of published medical/dental articles is growing at an exponential rate; this makes it difficult to collect all these resources and provide an organized and valuable/useful document. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses as high-level evidences are considered remedies for this concern. Continuous alterations in all fields of dental sciences necessitate the more of such high-level evidences. This study aimed on the quantity of endodontic systematic reviews and meta-analyses so far. This study began with targeted electronic searches of PubMed, and Cochrane library databases about the present systematic review and meta-analysis articles in endodontics within 2001–Jan 2012. Overall, 49 studies were systematic review and meta-analysis, the first comprised 34 articles and the latter contained seven articles; the remained eight studies had utilized both of them. Performing a topic sorting, 22 articles were about materials and techniques, 12 about pre- and post-treatment considerations, four about single/multiple visits, six with perio-prostho themes, and the five remained were of other topics. Limited number of 49 high-level evidences does not meet the expectation from endodontics as a boundless and progressive field of science. Therefore, more comprehensive and all-inclusive studies of systematic reviews and meta-analyses are compulsory in endodontics. The more the scientific-based endodontic practice, the more the high-level evidence based publications with good systematic reviews and favorable meta-analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Asgary, S., Sabbagh, S., & Eghbal, M. J. (2012). Published endodontic articles in PubMed-indexed journals from Iran. Iranian Endodontic Journal, 7, 1–5.
Available from http://ebd.ada.org/About.aspx. Accessed 20 Feb 2012.
Bader, J., & Ismail, A. (2004). Survey of systematic reviews in dentistry. JADA, 135, 464–467.
Clancy, C. M., & Cronin, K. (2005). Evidence-based decision making: Global evidence, local decisions. Health Affairs (Millwood), 24, 151–162.
Eghbal, M. J., Davari Ardakani, N., & Asgary, S. (2012). A scientometric study of PubMed-indexed endodontic articles: A comparison amongst Iran and other regional countries. Iranian Endodontic Journal, 7, 56–59.
Esfandiari, S., & Feine, J. (2011). Health technology assessment in oral health. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 26(Suppl), 93–100. discussion 101–2.
Fedorowicz, Z., Sequeira-Byron, P., Jagannath, V., & Sharif, M. O. (2011). Climate change in endodontics: Is it time to recycle “garbage in-garbage out” systematic reviews? Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology and Endodontics, 112, 515–517.
Gil-Montoya, J. A., Navarrete-Cortes, J., Pulgar, R., Santa, S., & Moya-Anegon, F. (2006). World dental research production: An ISI database approach (1999–2003). European Journal of Oral Sciences, 114, 102–108.
Ingle, J. I., & Slavkin, H. C. (2008). Modern endodontic therapy: Past, present and future. In J. Ingle, L. Bakland, & J. Baumgartner (Eds.), Ingle’s endodontics (6th ed., p. 29). Hamiliton: BC Decker, Inc.
Loe, H., & Lindberg, D. A. B. (1988). American contributions to the new age of dental research. US department of health and human services, p. 1.
Luu, N. S., Mandich, M. A., Tieu, L. D., Kaipatur, N., & Flores-Mir, C. (2011). The validity and reliability of mixed-dentition analysis methods: A systematic review. Journal of the American Dental Association, 142, 1143–1153.
McCabe, J. F., Walls, A. W. G. (2008). Science of dental materials (9th ed.). In: Applied Dental Materials (pp. 1–3). Singapour: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Meadows, L. M., Verdi, A. J., & Crabtree, B. F. (2003). Keeping up appearances: Using qualitative research to enhance knowledge of dental practice. Journal of Dental Education, 67, 981–990.
Moher, D., Jadad, A. R., Nichol, G., Penman, M., Tugwell, P., & Walsh, S. (1995). Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: An annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Controlled Clinical Trials, 16, 62–73.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151, 264–269.
Montori, V. M., Wilczynski, N. L., Morgan, D., & Haynes, R. B. (2003). Systematic reviews: A cross-sectional study of location and citation counts. BMC Medicine, 1, 2.
Reed, D., Price, E. G., Windish, D. M., Wright, S. M., Gozu, A., Hsu, E. B., et al. (2005). Challenges in systematic reviews of educational intervention studies. Annals of Internal Medicine, 142(12 Pt 2), 1080–1089.
Spångberg, L. S. (2007). Systematic reviews in endodontics: Examples of GIGO? Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology and Endodontics, 103, 723–724.
Torabinejad, M., & Bahjri, K. (2005). Essential elements of evidenced-based endodontics: Steps involved in conducting clinical research. Journal of Endodontics, 31, 563–569.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Asgary, S., Mehrdad, L. & Kheirieh, S. High-level evidences in endodontics. Scientometrics 94, 955–962 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0742-5
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0742-5