“The purpose of this systematic review was to review clini


“The purpose of this systematic review was to review clinical studies of fixed tooth-supported prostheses, and to assess the quality of evidence with an emphasis on the assessment of the reporting of outcome measurements. Multiple hypotheses were generated to compare the effect of study type on different outcome modifiers and to compare the quality of publications before and after January 2005. An electronic search was conducted using specific databases (MEDLINE via Ovid, EMBASE via Ovid, Cochrane Library) through July 2012. This was complemented by hand searching the past 10 years of issues of the Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry,

Journal of Prosthodontics, and the International Journal of Prosthodontics. All experimental and observational clinical studies evaluating Seliciclib price survival, success, failure, and

complications of tooth-supported extracoronal fixed partial dentures, crowns, and onlays were included. No restrictions on age or follow-up time were placed. The electronic search generated 14,869 papers, of which 206 papers were included for full-text review. Hand-searching added 23 papers. Inclusion criteria were met by 182 papers and were included for the review. The majority were retrospective studies. Only 8 (4.4%) PLX3397 supplier were randomized controlled trials. The majority of the studies measured survival and failure, and few studies recorded data on success; however, more than 60% of the studies failed to define survival, success, and failure. Many studies did not use any standardized criteria for assessment of the quality of the restorations and, when standardized criteria were used, they were modified, thereby not allowing for comparisons with other studies. There was an increase of 21.8% in the number of studies evaluating outcome measurements of all-ceramic restorations in past 8 years. Prosthodontic literature presents with a reduced percentage of RCTs compared to other disciplines in dentistry. The overall quality of recording prosthodontic

outcome measurements has not improved greatly in the past 8 years. “
“To systematically evaluate PRKD3 the survival and success of screw- versus cement-retained implant crowns. The authors performed an electronic search of nine databases using identical MeSH phrases. Systematic evaluation and data extraction of the articles from 1966 through 2007 were completed by three reviewers and two clinical academicians. The major outcome variable was implant or crown loss, and the minor outcome variables were screw loosening, decementation, and porcelain fracture. Random effects Poisson models were used to analyze the failure and complication rates. The initial search produced 26,582 articles. Of these, 577 titles and subsequently 295 abstracts were available for evaluation, with 81 full texts meeting the criteria for review. Data were extracted from 23 level one and two research studies. Fleiss’ kappa interevaluator agreement ranged from almost perfect to moderate. Major failures included 0.

Related posts:

  1. A recent systematic review
  2. The secondary outcome measures (muscle strength of upper and lowe
  3. The a priori criteria for studies to be included in the review ar
  4. More specifically, in the 2001 review it was observed that 80% of
  5. The most compelling evidence for this link is from studies (commu
This entry was posted in Antibody. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>