Critical appraisal of systematic reviews of intervention in dentistry published between 2019-2020 using the AMSTAR 2 tool.

Introduction The number of systematic reviews (SRs) in dentistry published each year has grown considerably, and they have been essential in clinical decision-making and health policy.Objective The objective is to critically appraise SRs of intervention in dentistry using the 'A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2' (AMSTAR 2) tool published within one year.Methods A search in the Medline/PubMed database was performed. The SRs were identified in two phases. The first phase identified SRs of interventions in dentistry by title and abstract. In the second phase, the full text was read, applying the eligibility criteria. Three calibrated reviewers methodologically assessed all SRs identified using the AMSTAR 2 tool. Data were analysed descriptively, and SRs were grouped according to methodological quality as moderate/high and low/critically low. A logistic regression model was applied to explore the associations between methodological quality and the study's characteristics.Results Two hundred and twenty-two SRs were included. The methodological quality of the SRs included in this study were: critically low (56.8%), low (27.9%), moderate (14.4%) and high (0.9%), according to AMSTAR 2. There were no statistical differences between moderate/high and low/critically low methodological quality and publication year, continent, journal Impact Factor and dental speciality.Conclusion Less than 1% of recently published SRs in dentistry were classified with high methodological quality. We hope that this study will alert researchers about the need to improve the methodological quality of SRs.

Mental health effects prevalence in children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic health crisis has changed household and school routines leaving children and adolescents without important anchors in life. This, in turn, can influence their mental health, changing their behavioral and psychological conditions. AIMS: To systematically review the literature to answer the question: "What is the worldwide prevalence of mental health effects in children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic?". METHODS: Embase, Epistemonikos database, LILACS, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and World Health Organization Global literature on coronavirus disease were searched. Grey literature was searched on Google Scholar, Grey Literature Report, and Preprint server MedRxiv. Observational studies assessing the prevalence of mental health effects in children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. Four authors independently collected the information and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. RESULTS: From a total of 11,925 identified studies, 2873 remained after the removal of the duplicated records. Nineteen studies remained after the final selection process. The proportion of emotional symptoms and behavior changes varied from 5.7% to 68.5%; anxiety 17.6% to 43.7%, depression 6.3% to 71.5%, and stress 7% to 25%. Other outcomes such as the prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder (85.5%) and suicidal ideation (29.7% to 31.3%) were also evaluated. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Overall findings showed that the proportion of children and adolescents presenting mental health effects during the COVID-19 pandemic showed a wide variation in different countries. However, there was a trend toward mental health issues. Therefore, policymakers, healthcare planners, youth mental health services, teachers, parents, and researchers need to be prepared to deal with this demand.

Prevalence of orofacial injuries in wheeled non-motor sports athletes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: As the popularity of sports activities grows, so do the number of sport-related injuries. Furthermore, sports that use equipment or vehicles that modify the speed of the player can present more serious injuries. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the overall prevalence of orofacial trauma in wheeled non-motor sports athletes. METHODS: The search strategy was applied in eight electronic databases (Embase, LILACS, Livivo, PEDro, PubMed, Scopus, SportDiscus, and Web of Science). Additionally, a complementary search of the gray literature (Google Scholar, OpenGrey, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global), reference lists of included articles, and studies indicated by experts on the subject was done. The included articles were observational studies with sufficient data of orofacial trauma (type and anatomical site) in wheeled non-motor sport athletes, regardless of the competition level. Risk of bias was assessed by using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data. The meta-analysis was performed using R Statistics software, and the strength of cumulative evidence was assessed by The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. RESULTS: From 4042 identified studies, after the removal of duplicates and phase one of selection (title and abstracts screening), 251 studies remained for phase two (full-text screening). Five articles were finally included. One study was considered to have a low risk of bias and four had a moderate risk of bias. The cumulative prevalence of orofacial injuries in wheeled non-motor sport athletes was 21.7% (CI: 8.7-34.7; I2 :97.6%) and the prevalence of dental injuries in these sports was 7.5% (CI:4.3-10.7; I2 :61.9%). The certainty in cumulative evidence was considered to be very low. CONCLUSION: About 22% of the wheeled non-motor sport athletes have suffered orofacial injuries. The most prevalent type of injury was classified as dental trauma.