Assessment of publication bias in dental specialty journals

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the presence of publication bias (acceptance of articles indicating statistically significant results). METHODS: The journals possessing the highest impact factor (2008 data) in each dental specialty were included in the study. The content of the 6 most recent issues of each journal was hand searched and research articles were classified into 4 type categories: cross-sectional, case-control, cohort, and interventional (nonrandomized clinical trials and randomized controlled trials). In total, 396 articles were included in the analysis. Descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the association between article-reported statistical significance (dependent variable) and journal impact factor and article study type subject area (independent variables). RESULTS: A statistically significant acceptance rate of positive result was found, ranging from 75% to 90%, whereas the value of impact factor was not related to publication bias among leading dental journals. Compared with other research designs, clinical intervention studies (randomized or nonrandomized) presented the highest percentage of nonsignificant findings (20%); RCTs represented 6% of the examined investigations. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the Journal of Clinical Periodontology, all other subspecialty journals, except the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, showed significantly decreased odds of publishing an RCT, which ranged from 60% to 93% (P < .05).

Reporting of research quality characteristics of studies published in 6 major clinical dental specialty journals

The objective of this article was to record reporting characteristics related to study quality of research published in major specialty dental journals with the highest impact factor (Journal of Endodontics, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics; Pediatric Dentistry, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, and International Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry). The included articles were classified into the following 3 broad subject categories: (1) cross-sectional (snap-shot), (2) observational, and (3) interventional. Multinomial logistic regression was conducted for effect estimation using the journal as the response and randomization, sample calculation, confounding discussed, multivariate analysis, effect measurement, and confidence intervals as the explanatory variables. The results showed that cross-sectional studies were the dominant design (55%), whereas observational investigations accounted for 13%, and interventions/clinical trials for 32%. Reporting on quality characteristics was low for all variables: random allocation (15%), sample size calculation (7%), confounding issues/possible confounders (38%), effect measurements (16%), and multivariate analysis (21%). Eighty-four percent of the published articles reported a statistically significant main finding and only 13% presented confidence intervals. The Journal of Clinical Periodontology showed the highest probability of including quality characteristics in reporting results among all dental journals.

[Oral medicine: a specialty placed between medicine and dentistry]

Oral medicine is a dental specialty that bridges the traditional areas of health between dentistry and medicine. International descriptions reflect this and oral medicine is defined as "the dental speciality placed at the interface between medicine and dentistry and is concerned with the diagnosis and management of (non-dental) pathology affecting the oral and maxillofacial region." Oral medicine specialists provide clinical care to patients with a wide variety of orofacial conditions, including oral mucosal diseases, orofacial pain syndromes, salivary gland disorders, and oral manifestations of systemic diseases. There is a growing need to implement this specialty globally: due to the rapid progress in both medicine and dentistry, and to the growing percentage of senior citizens in many countries, the adequate diagnosis and treatment of oral diseases will become even more complex in the future. In this article, the authors' intention is to point out that oral medicine is neither a recognized specialty nor a distinct field of study in Germany, Austria, or Switzerland; thus, the need for postgraduate training in this field in countries where oral medicine is not a specialization is emphasized.

Mislabeling controlled clinical trials (CCTs) as "randomized clinical trials (RCTs)" in dental specialty journals

This study aimed to investigate whether studies published in dental journals with the highest impact factor, representing the 5 major dental specialties and titled as randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are truly RCTs. A second objective was to explore the association of journal type and other publication characteristics on correct classification.

A retrospective analysis of patients referred for implant placement to a specialty clinic: indications, surgical procedures, and early failures

Purpose: This retrospective study analyzed the pool of patients referred for treatment with dental implants over a 3-year period in a referral specialty clinic. Materials and Methods: All patients receiving dental implants between 2002 and 2004 in the Department of Oral Surgery and Stomatology, University of Bern, were included in this retrospective study. Patients were analyzed according to age, gender, indications for implant therapy, location of implants, and type and length of implants placed. A cumulative logistic regression analysis was performed to identify and analyze potential risk factors for complications or failures. Results: A total of 1,206 patients received 1,817 dental implants. The group comprised 573 men and 633 women with a mean age of 55.2 years. Almost 60% of patients were age 50 or older. The most frequent indication for implant therapy was single-tooth replacement in the maxilla (522 implants or 28.7%). A total of 726 implants (40%) were inserted in the esthetically demanding region of the anterior maxilla. For 939 implants (51.7%), additional bone-augmentation procedures were required. Of these, ridge augmentation with guided bone regeneration was performed more frequently than sinus grafting. Thirteen complications leading to early failures were recorded, resulting in an early failure rate of 0.7%. The regression analysis failed to identify statistically significant failure etiologies for the variables assessed. Conclusions: From this study it can be concluded that patients referred to a specialty clinic for implant placement were more likely to be partially edentulous and over 50 years old. Single-tooth replacement was the most frequent indication (> 50%). Similarly, additional bone augmentation was indicated in more than 50% of cases. Adhering to strict patient selection criteria and a standardized surgical protocol, an early failure rate of 0.7% was experienced in this study population

Reporting completeness of abstracts of systematic reviews published in leading dental specialty journals

The aim of this study was to investigate the reporting completeness of systematic review (SR) abstracts in leading dental specialty journals. Electronic and supplementary hand searching were undertaken to identify SRs published in seven dental specialty journals and in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Abstract reporting completeness was evaluated using a checklist derived from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (prisma) guidelines. Descriptive statistics followed by univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. Two-hundred and eighteen SR abstracts were identified. Reporting of interventions (94%), objectives (96%), data sources (81%), eligibility criteria (77%), and conclusions (97%) was adequate in the majority of reviews. However, inadequate reporting of participants (18%), results (42%), effect size (14%), level of significance (60%), and trial registration (100%) was commonplace. The mean overall reporting score was 79.1% (95% CI, 77.6-80.6). Only journal of publication was a significant predictor of overall reporting, with inferior results for all journals relative to Cochrane reviews, with scores ranging from -4.3% (95% CI, -8.74 to 0.08) to -35.6% (95% CI, -42.0 to -24.3) for the International Journal of Prosthodontics and the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, respectively. Improved reporting of dental SR abstracts is needed and should be encouraged, as these abstracts may underpin influential clinical decisions.

Reporting quality of abstracts of randomized controlled trials published in dental specialty journals

OBJECTIVES A widespread assessment of the reporting of RCT abstracts published in dental journals is lacking. Our aim was to investigate the quality of reporting of abstracts published in leading dental specialty journals using, as a guide, the CONSORT for abstracts checklist. METHODS Electronic and supplementary hand searching were undertaken to identify RCTs published in seven dental specialty journals. The quality of abstract reporting was evaluated using a modified checklist based on the CONSORT for abstracts checklist. Descriptive statistics followed by univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. RESULTS 228 RCT abstracts were identified. Reporting of interventions, objectives and conclusions within abstracts were adequate. Inadequately reported items included: title, participants, outcomes, random number generation, numbers randomized and effect size estimate. Randomization restrictions, allocation concealment, blinding, numbers analyzed, confidence intervals, intention-to-treat analysis, harms, registration and funding were rarely described. CONCLUSIONS The mean overall reporting quality score was suboptimal at 62.5% (95% CI: 61.9, 63.0). Significantly better abstract reporting was noted in certain specialty journals and in multicenter trials.

Are clustering effects accounted for in statistical analysis in leading dental specialty journals?

OBJECTIVES In dental research multiple site observations within patients or taken at various time intervals are commonplace. These clustered observations are not independent; statistical analysis should be amended accordingly. This study aimed to assess whether adjustment for clustering effects during statistical analysis was undertaken in five specialty dental journals. METHODS Thirty recent consecutive issues of Orthodontics (OJ), Periodontology (PJ), Endodontology (EJ), Maxillofacial (MJ) and Paediatric Dentristry (PDJ) journals were hand searched. Articles requiring adjustment accounting for clustering effects were identified and statistical techniques used were scrutinized. RESULTS Of 559 studies considered to have inherent clustering effects, adjustment for this was made in the statistical analysis in 223 (39.1%). Studies published in the Periodontology specialty accounted for clustering effects in the statistical analysis more often than articles published in other journals (OJ vs. PJ: OR=0.21, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.37, p<0.001; MJ vs. PJ: OR=0.02, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.07, p<0.001; PDJ vs. PJ: OR=0.14, 95% CI: 0.07, 0.28, p<0.001; EJ vs. PJ: OR=0.11, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.22, p<0.001). A positive correlation was found between increasing prevalence of clustering effects in individual specialty journals and correct statistical handling of clustering (r=0.89). CONCLUSIONS The majority of studies in 5 dental specialty journals (60.9%) examined failed to account for clustering effects in statistical analysis where indicated, raising the possibility of inappropriate decreases in p-values and the risk of inappropriate inferences.

Active implementation strategy of CONSORT adherence by a dental specialty journal improved randomized clinical trial reporting.

OBJECTIVE To describe a novel CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) adherence strategy implemented by the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (AJO-DO) and to report its impact on the completeness of reporting of published trials. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING The AJO-DO CONSORT adherence strategy, initiated in June 2011, involves active assessment of randomized clinical trial (RCT) reporting during the editorial process. The completeness of reporting CONSORT items was compared between trials submitted and published during the implementation period (July 2011 to September 2013) and trials published between August 2007 and July 2009. RESULTS Of the 42 RCTs submitted (July 2011 to September 2013), 23 were considered for publication and assessed for completeness of reporting, seven of which were eventually published. For all published RCTs between 2007 and 2009 (n = 20), completeness of reporting by CONSORT item ranged from 0% to 100% (Median = 40%, interquartile range = 60%). All published trials in 2011-2013, reported 33 of 37 CONSORT (sub) items. Four CONSORT 2010 checklist items remained problematic even after implementation of the adherence strategy: changes to methods (3b), changes to outcomes (6b) after the trial commenced, interim analysis (7b), and trial stopping (14b), which are typically only reported when applicable. CONCLUSION Trials published following implementation of the AJO-DO CONSORT adherence strategy completely reported more CONSORT items than those published or submitted previously.

Implant therapy in a surgical specialty clinic: an analysis of patients, indications, surgical procedures, risk factors, and early failures

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to analyze the patient pool referred to a specialty clinic for implant surgery over a 3-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS All patients receiving dental implants between 2008 and 2010 at the Department of Oral Surgery and Stomatology were included in the study. As primary outcome parameters, the patients were analyzed according to the following criteria: age, sex, systemic diseases, and indication for therapy. For the inserted implants, the type of surgical procedure, the types of implants placed, postsurgical complications, and early failures were recorded. A logistic regression analysis was performed to identify possible local and systemic risk factors for complications. As a secondary outcome, data regarding demographics and surgical procedures were compared with the findings of a historic study group (2002 to 2004). RESULTS A total of 1,568 patients (792 women and 776 men; mean age, 52.6 years) received 2,279 implants. The most frequent indication was a single-tooth gap (52.8%). Augmentative procedures were performed in 60% of the cases. Tissue-level implants (72.1%) were more frequently used than bone-level implants (27.9%). Regarding dimensions of the implants, a diameter of 4.1 mm (59.7%) and a length of 10 mm (55.0%) were most often utilized. An early failure rate of 0.6% was recorded (13 implants). Patients were older and received more implants in the maxilla, and the complexity of surgical interventions had increased when compared to the patient pool of 2002 to 2004. CONCLUSION Implant therapy performed in a surgical specialty clinic utilizing strict patient selection and evidence-based surgical protocols showed a very low early failure rate of 0.6%.

Indications and Frequency for the Use of Cone Beam Computed Tomography for Implant Treatment Planning in a Specialty Clinic

PURPOSE To analyze the indications and frequency for three-dimensional (3D) imaging for implant treatment planning in a pool of patients referred to a specialty clinic over a 3-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS All patients who received dental implants between 2008 and 2010 at the Department of Oral Surgery and Stomatology at the University of Bern were included in the study. The influence of age, gender, and time of treatment (2008 to 2010) on the frequency of use of two-dimensional (2D) radiographic imaging modalities alone or in combination with 3D cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans was analyzed. Furthermore, the influence of the indication, location, and need for bone augmentation on the frequency of use of 2D imaging modalities alone or in combination with CBCT was evaluated. RESULTS In all, 1,568 patients (792 women and 776 men) received 2,279 implants. Overall, 633 patients (40.4%) were analyzed with 2D imaging procedures alone. CBCT was performed in 935 patients (59.6%). There was a statistically significant increase in CBCT between 2008 and 2010. Patients older than 55 years received a CBCT scan in addition to 2D radiographic imaging statistically significantly more often. Additional 3D imaging was most frequently performed in the posterior maxilla, whereas 2D radiographs alone exhibited the highest frequency in the anterior mandible. The combination of 2D with CBCT was used predominantly for implant placement with simultaneous or staged guided bone regeneration or sinus elevation. CONCLUSION Based on these findings from a specialty clinic, the use of additional CBCT imaging for implant treatment planning is influenced by the indication, location, local anatomy (including the need for bone augmentation), and the age of the patient.