Meta-analysis in oral health care

Institute for Medical Informatics and Biostatistics, Riehen/Basel, Switzerland.
Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology (Impact Factor: 1.46). 03/1999; 87(2):135-41. DOI: 10.1016/S1079-2104(99)70262-3
Source: PubMed
1 Read
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although the question on the efficacy of chlorhexidine therapy for the clinician's adult patient may not have been totally answered, a greater perspective on this treatment modality was gained by the reader because of the quality of the overview cited, and the evidence-based approach used by the authors in performing the overview.
    Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 08/2000; 84(1):17-21. DOI:10.1067/mpr.2000.108651 · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • Source
    M M Ash ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There are several terms that identify proposed paradigms for the way things ought to be carried out in the health sciences: evidence-based, cause-and-effect, diagnostic gold-standard, patient-centred-outcomes, risk assessment, cost/benefit/risk, and efficacious/effective. Collectively these paradigms exhibit varying degrees of interdependence, and have the potential for changing the way dentistry is practiced. A paradigm can be thought of as a standard by which research and health science ought to be conducted and evaluated. In this sense scientists and clinicians try to figure out how to account for various observations and phenomena dictated by paradigms or models of health care; however, it may become necessary to shift to new paradigms that are more consistent with scientific and clinically reality. Some of the potential effects of these shifting paradigms on the practice and teaching of occlusion and temporomandibular disorders are considered.
    Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 02/2001; 28(1):1-13. DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2842.2001.00658.x · 1.68 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To every clinical encounter, dentists bring expertise, clinical skills, and past experience. Patients bring their unique values, preferences, concerns, and expectations. Dentists hope and patients expect that the best, most up-to-date, clinically relevant knowledge, especially from patient-centered research, will be available to guide the clinical decision-making process. Unfortunately, there is an over-abundance of evidence, which is poorly organized and difficult to access in the biomedical literature, and whose quality is highly variable. Busy clinicians may have neither the time nor, in many cases, the skills to seek evidence to inform decisions. Pre-appraised evidence, found in evidence-based journals, systematic reviews, and clinical practice guidelines, has the potential to make evidence-based practice feasible for front-line dentists. Systematic reviews, with their ability to quality-filter and synthesize large amounts of evidence and provide the foundation for practice guidelines, are central to the evidence-based process.
    Journal of Evidence Based Dental Practice 03/2004; 4(1):47–51. DOI:10.1016/j.jebdp.2004.02.021
Show more