An AMSTAR assessment of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of oral healthcare interventions published in the Journal of Applied Oral Science (JAOS)

Systematic reviews are not an assembly of anecdotes but a distillation of current best available evidence on a particular topic and as such have an important role to play in evidence-based healthcare. A substantial proportion of these systematic reviews focus on interventions, and are able to provide clinicians with the opportunity to understand and translate the best available evidence on the effects of these healthcare interventions into clinical practice. The importance of systematic reviews in summarising and identifying the gaps in evidence which might inform new research initiatives is also widely acknowledged. Their potential impact on practice and research makes their methodological quality especially important as it may directly influence their utility for clinicians, patients and policy makers. The objectives of this study were to identify systematic reviews of oral healthcare interventions published in the Journal of Applied Oral Science (JAOS) and to evaluate their methodological quality using the evaluation tool, AMSTAR.

A PRISMA assessment of the reporting quality of systematic reviews in orthodontics

Abstract Objectives: To assess the reporting quality of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews (SR) in orthodontics and to compare the reporting quality (PRISMA score) with methodological quality (AMSTAR criteria). Materials and Methods: Systematic reviews (n  =  109) published between January 2000 and July 2011 in five leading orthodontic journals were identified and included. The quality of reporting of the included reviews was assessed by two authors in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Each article was assigned a cumulative grade based on fulfillment of the applicable criteria, and an overall percentage score was assigned. Descriptive statistics and simple and multiple linear regression analyses were undertaken. Results: The mean overall PRISMA score was 64.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 62%-65%). The quality of reporting was considerably better in reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (P < .001) than in non-Cochrane reviews. Both multivariable and univariable analysis indicated that journal of publication and number of authors was significantly associated with the PRISMA score. The association between AMSTAR score and modified PRISMA score was also found to be highly statistically significant. Conclusion: Compliance of orthodontic SRs published in orthodontic journals with PRISMA guidelines was deficient in several areas. The quality of reporting assessed using PRISMA guidelines was significantly better in orthodontic SRs published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

Solutions to the Chronological Puzzles in Book 1 of the Chronicle of Matthew of Edessa

The chronological inconsistency in the first book of Matthew of Edessa's Chronicle is well-known. Some of his are dates accurate to the day, while others err by up to 50 years, with no immediately apparent pattern of error. In this talk I will examine some of these chronological puzzles, by untangling the five main themes that run through the book. By demonstrating how these chronological errors may have arisen, and why certain events in the chronicle are dated much more accurately than others, light may be shed on the sources and methodologies that Matthew used to compose his chronicle.

The origin of the low-spin character of the resting state of cytochrome P450cam investigated by means of active site analogues

Crown-capped iron(S−) porphyrins 1·H2O and 2·H2O and their corresponding Ba2+ complexes have been prepared as active site analogues of the resting state of cytochrome P450cam. cw-EPR studies and electronic structure calculations at the density functional theory (DFT) level of model systems suggest a functional role of the water cluster of P450cam.

John Calvin's Impact on Church and Society, 1509-2009. Essays for the 500th birthday of Calvin

A tribute to the monumental influence of John Calvin in the 500 years since his birth. / What legacies, still enduring today, have John Calvin and Calvinism given to the church and society in Europe and North America? An international group of scholars tackles that question in this volume honoring Calvin's 500th birthday. These chapters together provide a comprehensive and accessible introduction to Calvin's life and thought, the history of the Reformation in Switzerland and worldwide, and his continuing relevance for ecclesial, social, and political questions today. / Contributors: Philip Benedict, James D. Bratt, Emidio Campi, Wulfert de Greef, Christopher Elwood, Eva-Maria Faber, Eric Fuchs, Ulrich H. J. Krtner, Christian Link, Christian Moser, Andrew Pettegree, Christoph Strohm, Mario Turchetti./ The essays in this book fit beautifully together to provide a solid, complete work that gives precise insight into the many different facets of Calvin and Calvinism. The high-level research found here clearly shows the great impact that Calvin has had on both church and society. It is a great pleasure to see Calvin here anew. Eberhard Busch / University of Gttingen / That John Calvin made a deep and lasting impact on many aspects of history is common knowledge but the character of the man and the nature of his influence are perhaps as controversial as any that can be named. It is thus a challenge to examine even a fraction of the many ways that Calvins life and thought have contributed to the shaping of later ages in both church and society. This volume offers essays on key points from an appropriately international group of authors appreciative but critical, drawing on a rich range of recent scholarship, presented in a pleasing and accessible form. It is a fine place for the new reader of Calvin to get a glimpse of his impact, while offering a fresh summary of some significant issues for more advanced students of the Reformer. Elsie Anne McKee / Princeton Theological Seminary / Hirzel and Sallmann have succeeded in gathering essays by an illustrious circle of experts both historians and theologians on important areas of Calvins thought and impact. Ranging from an insignificant city at the edge of the Swiss Confederation in the 1530s to the Accra Confession of 2004, these essays will serve to correct popular misconceptions. A fine introduction for a broader readership that wants more than mere armchair theology. Peter Opitz / University of Zurich

The Quality of the Evidence According to GRADE Is Predominantly Low or Very Low in Oral Health Systematic Reviews

OBJECTIVES The main objective was to assess the credibility of the evidence using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) in oral health systematic reviews on the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and elsewhere. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Systematic Reviews or meta-analyses (January 2008-December 2013) from 14 high impact general dental and specialty dental journals and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were screened for meta-analyses. Data was collected at the systematic review, meta-analysis and trial level. Two reviewers applied and agreed on the GRADE rating for the selected meta-analyses. RESULTS From the 510 systematic reviews initially identified 91 reviews (41 Cochrane and 50 non-Cochrane) were eligible for inclusion. The quality of evidence was high in 2% and moderate in 18% of the included meta-analyses with no difference between Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews, journal impact factor or year of publication. The most common domains prompting downgrading of the evidence were study limitations (risk of bias) and imprecision (risk of play of chance). CONCLUSION The quality of the evidence in oral health assessed using GRADE is predominantly low or very low suggesting a pressing need for more randomised clinical trials and other studies of higher quality in order to inform clinical decisions thereby reducing the risk of instituting potentially ineffective and/or harmful therapies.

The evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in orthodontic literature. Where do we stand?

AIM To analyse meta-analyses included in systematic reviews (SRs) published in leading orthodontic journals and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) focusing on orthodontic literature and to assess the quality of the existing evidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS Electronic searching was undertaken to identify SRs published in five major orthodontic journals and the CDSR between January 2000 and June 2014. Quality assessment of the overall body of evidence from meta-analyses was conducted using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group (GRADE) tool. RESULTS One hundred and fifty-seven SRs were identified; meta-analysis was present in 43 of these (27.4 per cent). The highest proportion of SRs that included a meta-analysis was found in Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research (6/13; 46.1 per cent), followed by the CDSR (12/33; 36.4 per cent) and the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics (15/44; 34.1 per cent). Class II treatment was the most commonly addressed topic within SRs in orthodontics (n = 18/157; 11.5 per cent). The number of trials combined to produce a summary estimate was small for most meta-analyses with a median of 4 (range: 2-52). Only 21 per cent (n = 9) of included meta-analyses were considered to have a high/moderate quality of evidence according to GRADE, while the majority were of low or very low quality (n = 34; 79.0 per cent). CONCLUSIONS Overall, approximately one quarter of orthodontic SRs included quantitative synthesis, with a median of four trials per meta-analysis. The overall quality of evidence from the selected orthodontic SRs was predominantly low to very low indicating the relative lack of high quality of evidence from SRs to inform clinical practice guidelines.