Assessing the roles and challenges of librarians in dental systematic and scoping reviews.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the scope of experience, roles, and challenges that librarians face in participating in dental and oral health systematic and scoping reviews to inform outreach efforts to researchers and identify areas for librarian professional development. METHODS: The authors developed a twenty-three-item survey based on the findings of two recent articles about health sciences librarians' roles and challenges in conducting systematic and scoping reviews. The survey was distributed via electronic mailing lists to librarians who were likely to have participated in conducting dental systematic and scoping reviews. RESULTS: While survey respondents reported participating in many dental reviews, they participated more commonly in systematic reviews than in scoping reviews. Also, they worked less commonly on dental and oral health reviews than on non-dental reviews. Librarian roles in dental reviews tended to follow traditional librarian roles: all respondents had participated in planning and information retrieval stages, whereas fewer respondents had participated in screening and assessing articles. The most frequently reported challenges involved the lead reviewer or review team rather than the librarians themselves, with time- and methodology-related challenges being most common. CONCLUSIONS: Although librarians might not be highly involved in dental and oral health systematic and scoping reviews, more librarian participation in these reviews, either as methodologists or information experts, may improve their reviews' overall quality.

Webpalestra COVID-19 (Coronavírus): prática baseada em evidência na odontologia durante a pandemia do COVID-19

Assista mais vídeos sobre COVID-19 no link abaixo: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... Assista mais vídeos da série Tele Saúde Bucal no link abaixo: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... Acesse os slides das nossas palestras na Biblioteca Virtual do Telessaúde ES! Confira a data da exibição e encontre o material desejado. Faça download e tenha o material preparado pelos nossos palestrantes. https://telessaude.ifes.edu.br/biblio...

¿Estamos preparados para ejercer una Endodoncia basada en la evidencia? / No disponible

No disponible

Evidence-based Dentistry and Its Role in Caring for Special Needs Patients.

Evidence-based dentistry is a concept ideally suited and applicable to special needs dentistry. As the special needs of patients varies according to the individual, so should the way we evaluate our patient, prescribe a course of treatment, and implement that treatment plan. Future generations of dental students and residents should be trained in these concepts not just for patients with special needs, but also for the general patient population. It is imperative that the dental community not retreat in the face of what many deem to be "difficult" patients with special needs. Knowledge and training can overcome many barriers to treatment.

Design of a Medical Triage Evidence-Based Clinical Management Protocol and Implementation of Medical Triage On-Line Training for Use by Mission of Mercy Volunteers.

Evidence-based protocols in safety net settings can help standardize care practices, increase organizational workflow, and enhance quality outcomes for those receiving services. The purpose of this quality improvement project is two-fold: to design an evidence-based medical triage clinical management protocol, and, to influence adherence to that protocol by safety net medical triage volunteers through an on-line volunteer orientation. Leadership skills were required to help translate evidence-based practice recommendations into useful tools to assist in directing practice. Project outcomes included successful multidisciplinary practice change, significantly improved volunteer knowledge surrounding medical triage protocol parameters, increased organizational workflow, and enhanced quality client outcomes.

Bridging community dental practitioners to research: the South Texas Oral Health Network (STOHN).

Dental practice-based research networks (PBRNs) are a consortia of practices committed to supporting research projects aimed at improving clinical care. Participation in a PBRN provides investigative experience for dental practitioners as they contribute to the evidence base for dental practice, and it returns the information gained from the network back to the practices with the goal of improving the quality of care. The South Texas Oral Health Network (STOHN), affiliated with the University of Texas Health Science Center in San Antonio, was established through the Clinical Translational Science Award funded by the National Institutes of Health in May 2008. STOHN provides a centralized university-based infrastructure, a link to research resources, and an engine to move projects forward. This infrastructure allows dental practitioners and faculty to easily participate actively in research leading to collaborative community partnerships. STOHN's 31 members are very committed to participating in research activities and have contributed to research at each stage of its development. This article outlines an approach to building a research network, and it provides examples of clinical achievements from the dental practice-based research.

Cochrane systematic reviews in orthodontics.

INTRODUCTION: The Cochrane Collaboration is an international scientific not-for-profit organization the purpose of which is to produce and distribute systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials. The aim of this paper is to list the different existing Cochrane systematic reviews in the field of dentofacial orthopedics (DFO) and to analyse their main features. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The choice of Cochrane systematic reviews based on dentofacial orthopedics was made from the exhaustive list published by the Cochrane Oral Health Group. RESULTS: A total of 12 systematic Cochrane reviews related to dentofacial orthopedics were listed. All concluded on the need to conduct randomized clinical trials using more appropriate methodologies and comprising larger samples. None of these systematic reviews offered clear proof supporting any one form of treatment or treatment modality. DISCUSSION: Despite the lack of relevant conclusions in the still meagre number of Cochrane systematic reviews related to DFO, it is essential for orthodontists to regularly consult the reviews in the framework of their daily evidence-based orthodontic practice. This is true too for orthodontic researchers as clinical DFO research needs to be extended with the setting up of methodologically unquestionable randomized clinical trials. However, there exist alternatives to randomized clinical trials offering a lower level of proof but which are better suited to the field of dentofacial orthopedics.