...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of periodontal research >Quality of methods and reporting in association studies of chronic periodontitis and IL1A IL1A ?889 and IL1B ?889 and IL1B +3953/4 +3953/4 SNPs: A systematic review
【24h】

Quality of methods and reporting in association studies of chronic periodontitis and IL1A IL1A ?889 and IL1B ?889 and IL1B +3953/4 +3953/4 SNPs: A systematic review

机译:慢性牙周炎和IL1A IL1A的关联研究的方法和报告质量和报告?889和IL1B?889和IL1B + 3953/4 + 3953/4 SNP:系统审查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Objective The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the quality of reporting and methodology in genetic association studies between IL1A ?889 and IL1B +3954 polymorphisms and chronic periodontitis. Background Evidence provided by periodontal research on genetic risk factors is of uttermost importance in clinical practice as a possible diagnostic and prognostic tool for periodontitis. Inadequate reporting of results as well as high risk of bias due to methodological inconsistency hampers the integration of evidence in terms of clinical applicability. Methods This review includes case‐control studies in humans published between 1997 and July 2017. Searching was conducted through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and search handing . Specific scoring systems have been developed to evaluate the quality of methods and reporting. Each article was scored according to its adequacy, and then, the total number and the percentage of items positively qualified for both methods and reporting were calculated. The quality of methods in studies scoring 0‐6, 7‐12, and 13‐16 was, respectively, considered poor, moderate, and good. For reporting, scores of 0‐9, 10‐18, and 19‐26 were deemed of poor, moderate, and good quality, respectively. Pearson's correlation coefficient was calculated to explore the correlation between the year of publication and the quality in terms of methods and reporting. Results From the 531 screened studies, 52 met the inclusion criteria and were thus included in the study. The quality of methods and reporting of published genetic association papers on IL1 and chronic periodontitis is moderate. On a scale from 0 to 16, the mean score for methods of the reviewed studies was 8.19?±?1.93. The items more frequently considered inadequate concerned the handling of confounders in statistical analysis, especially oral hygiene habits, socioeconomic status, subgingival colonization of specific periodontal pathogens, and stress. A significant positive correlation was found between the year of publication and the quality scores in terms of method ( r ?=?0.401, P ?=?0.003). In terms of reporting, the mean score was 14.83?±?3.04 on a scale from 0 to 26 and it was considered overall moderate. No statistically significant correlation was found between the year of publication and the quality of reporting ( P ?=?0.266). Conclusions The association between IL1A ?889 and IL1B +3954 polymorphisms and chronic periodontitis is questionable due to methodological inconsistency. Evidence arising from meta‐analysis is unreliable due to high risk of bias and moderate quality in terms of reporting.
机译:目的对这一系统审查的目的是评估IL1Aα889和IL1B + 3954多态性和慢性牙周炎之间的遗传关联研究中的报告和方法的质量。背景技术遗传危险因素的牙周研究提供的证据是临床实践中的最重要的,作为牙周炎可能的诊断和预后工具。由于方法不一致的结果,结果的报告不充分,并且由于方法不一致而妨碍了临床适用性的依据整合。方法本综述包括1997年至2017年7月在1997年至7月期间发布的人类对照研究。搜索是通过Medline,EMBASE和搜索处理进行的。已经开发了具体的评分系统来评估方法和报告的质量。根据其充分率评分,然后,计算每篇文章,然后计算总数和对两种方法和报告的项目的百分比。分别进行研究中的研究质量分别,认为差,中等和良好。对于报告,分数分别为0-9,10-18和19-26分别被视为差,中等,质量好。 Pearson的相关系数计算出探讨出版年与方法和报告方面的相关性。 531筛选研究的结果,52符合纳入标准,因此包括在研究中。发表的IL1和慢性牙周炎发表遗传术纸的方法和报告的质量是适中的。在0到16的范围内,审查研究的方法的平均分数为8.19?±1.93。这些项目更常见的是涉及在统计分析中处理混淆,尤其是口腔卫生习惯,社会经济地位,特定牙周病原体的潜在殖民地和压力。在发布年和方法方面,在方法(R?= 0.401,p≤0.003)之间存在显着的正相关性。在报告方面,平均得分为14.83?±3.04,从0到26的等级,它被认为是整体中等的。在出版的年份和报告质量之间没有发现统计学上显着的相关性(P?= 0.266)。结论由于方法不一致,IL1Aα889和IL1B +3954多态性和慢性牙周炎的关联是可疑的。由于报告方面的偏见风险高,所以荟萃分析产生的证据是不可靠的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号