liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Validation methodology in publications describing epidemiological registration methods of dental caries: a systematic review
Department of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden.
Dental Commissioning Unit, Co. Cncl. of Östergötland, Linköping, Sweden.
Department of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden.
2003 (English)In: Community Dental Health, ISSN 0265-539X, Vol. 20, no 4, 251-259 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: The aim was to describe and systematically review the methodology and reporting of validation in publications describing epidemiological registration methods for dental caries.

Basic research methodology: Literature searches were conducted in six scientific databases. All publications fulfilling the predetermined inclusion criteria were assessed for methodology and reporting of validation using a checklist including items described previously as well as new items. The frequency of endorsement of the assessed items was analysed. Moreover, the type and strength of evidence, was evaluated.

Main outcome measures: Reporting of predetermined items relating to methodology of validation and the frequency of endorsement of the assessed items were of primary interest.

Results: Initially 588 publications were located. 74 eligible publications were obtained, 23 of which fulfilled the inclusion criteria and remained throughout the analyses. A majority of the studies reported the methodology of validation. The reported methodology of validation was generally inadequate, according to the recommendations of evidence-based medicine. The frequencies of reporting the assessed items (frequencies of endorsement) ranged from four to 84 per cent. A majority of the publications contributed to a low strength of evidence.

Conclusion: There seems to be a need to improve the methodology and the reporting of validation in publications describing professionally registered caries epidemiology. Four of the items assessed in this study are potentially discriminative for quality assessments of reported validation.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2003. Vol. 20, no 4, 251-259 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-84952PubMedID: 14696746OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-84952DiVA: diva2:563138
Available from: 2012-10-29 Created: 2012-10-29 Last updated: 2017-12-07
In thesis
1. Randomised clinical trials and evidence-based general dentistry
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Randomised clinical trials and evidence-based general dentistry
2004 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

A growing number of scientific publications and new treatment modalities have increased the difficulties of keeping up to date with the latest research evidence in clinical practice. Therefore, evidence-based dentistry and medicine (EBDM) has evolved as an attempt to summarise current best evidence.

The overall aim of this thesis was to study the availability and the methodological quality of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in dental (RCT-Ds) and medical (RCT-Ms) research, and publications describing epidemiological registration methods of dental caries. It also examines the applicability of evidence-based methods to general dental practice.

The most important findings were that the armual number of publications in dental research showed a decreasing trend from 1969 to 1999, whereas medical research increased. The armual number of clinical trials (CTs), meta-analyses and RCTs increased, but represented just a fraction of all publications in both dental and medical research. Medical subject heading (MeSH) searches provided an overall adequate method for rapid location of RCT-Ds on Medline for most areas of dental research. The quality of RCT-Ds and RCT-Ms were generally inadequate. There was no correlation between the quality of RCTs and Journal Impact Factor. The armual number of publications, CTs and RCTs in periodontal research (RCT-Ps) increased during 1980-2000. A few clinical research areas dominated the RCT-Ps. Most of the RCT-Ps were published in just two different dental journals. Validation methodology in publications describing epidemiological methods for registering dental caries was inadequate according to EBDM recommendations and needs to be improved.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköpings universitet, 2004. 57 p.
Series
Linköping University Medical Dissertations, ISSN 0345-0082 ; 865
Keyword
Dental care, dental research, epidemiological methods, evidence-based medicine, Medline, randomized controlled trials, validity
National Category
Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-22686 (URN)1978 (Local ID)91-7373-839-5 (ISBN)1978 (Archive number)1978 (OAI)
Public defence
2004-11-12, Aulan, Hälsans Hus, Hälsouniversitetet, Linköping, 13:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Available from: 2009-10-07 Created: 2009-10-07 Last updated: 2012-10-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

PubMed

Authority records BETA

Sjögren, Petteri

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sjögren, Petteri
In the same journal
Community Dental Health
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 24 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf