DATA SOURCES Sources of reviews were the Database of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) and completed systematic reviews registered by the Cochrane Oral Health Group in the Cochrane Library. STUDY SELECTION All systematic reviews that examined the effectiveness of interventions for oral, dental and craniofacial disorders and diseases were eligible for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS A quality assessment checklist was completed for each study. RESULTS A total of 115 studies were identified, of which 65 were relevant to the review. The area most frequently evaluated within the reviews was pain relief or prevention (20 out of 65, ie, 31%) followed by caries, and oral medicine. The quality assessment of the systematic reviews identified highlighted key areas where improvements could be made. One major weakness was that the search strategies employed in reviews were not always adequate: only 12 reviews (19%) demonstrated an attempt to identify all relevant studies. Other areas of weakness include the screening and quality assessment of primary studies, the pooling of data and examination of heterogeneity, and the interpretation of findings. CONCLUSIONS The quality of systematic reviews in dentistry could be improved. If future clinical decisions are to be based upon systematic reviews, it is imperative that reviews address clinically-relevant, focused questions, and follow a transparent, well-designed protocol.

中文翻译：

---

牙科系统评价的质量。

数据来源评价的来源是有效性评价数据库（DARE），并由Cochrane口腔健康小组在Cochrane图书馆中注册完成的系统评价。研究选择所有检查口腔，牙齿和颅面疾病和疾病的干预措施有效性的系统评价均符合纳入条件。数据提取与合成每个研究均完成了质量评估清单。结果共鉴定出115项研究，其中65项与该评价有关。评价中最常评估的领域是疼痛缓解或预防（65分中的20分，即31％），其次是龋齿和口服药物。系统评价的质量评估确定了可以改进的关键领域。一个主要的弱点是评论中采用的搜索策略并不总是足够的：只有12条评论（占19％）表明试图识别所有相关研究。其他弱点包括对基础研究的筛查和质量评估，数据汇总和异质性检查以及对结果的解释。结论牙科系统评价的质量可以提高。如果将来的临床决策要基于系统评价，则必须解决临床相关，重点突出的问题，并遵循透明，精心设计的方案。数据汇总和异质性检查，以及对结果的解释。结论牙科系统评价的质量可以提高。如果将来的临床决策要基于系统评价，则必须解决临床相关，重点突出的问题，并遵循透明，精心设计的方案。数据汇总和异质性检查，以及对结果的解释。结论牙科系统评价的质量可以提高。如果将来的临床决策要基于系统评价，则必须解决临床相关，重点突出的问题，并遵循透明，精心设计的方案。