Edition V20N01 | Year 2015 | Editorial Evidence based Orthodontics | Pages 17 to 19
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as already reported in the opening article of this section, are the highest level of scientific evidence1 and may strengthen clinically useful evidence.2 That means that, according to evidence-based Dentistry, clinically significant results found in clinical and laboratorial researches will be incorporated in clinical practice, especially in dependence on conclusions drawn from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. For this reason, assessing articles and understanding their findings may be a valuable time saver for every clinician who wishes to introduce new conducts, technologies or treatments into his/her clinical practice in a responsible and scientific manner. Therefore, reading a good systematic review or meta-analysis would prevent clinicians from reading several original research articles (which may be gathered in the systematic review) with a view to reaching a clinical conclusion. However, it is critical for the clinician to read systematic reviews and meta-analyses with a minimum comprehension of their structure and characteristics in order to interpret their findings in a reliable and clinically advantageous manner.
Mattos CT, Ruellas ACO. Systematic review and meta- analysis: What are the implications in the clinical practice? Dental Press J Orthod. 2015 Jan-Feb;20(1):17-9. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2176-9451.20.1.017- 019.ebo