|
| Padmanabhan and Gupta 2010 [48] | Shayesteh et al. 2013 [49] |
Marković et al. 2011 [55] | Stacchi et al. 2013 [11] | Turkyilmaz et al. 2008 [51] | Marković et al. 2013 [50] | Alghamdi et al. 2011 [52] | Katsoulis et al. 2012 [32] | García-Morales et al. 2012 [53] |
|
(1) The study sample represents the population of interest with regard to key characteristics, sufficient to limit potential bias to the results | Unclear | Yes | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Yes |
|
(2) Loss to follow-up is unrelated to key characteristics (i.e., the study data adequately represent the sample), sufficient to limit potential bias | Yes | Unclear | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
|
(3) The prognostic factor of interest is adequately measured in study participants, sufficient to limit potential bias. (n these studies the prognostic factor was the surgical technique) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Unclear | Yes | Yes | Yes |
|
(4) The outcome of interest is adequately measured in study participants, sufficient to limit bias. (The outcome was the primary and/or secondary stability) | Unclear | Unclear | Yes | Yes | Unclear | Yes | Unclear | Unclear | Yes |
|
(5) Important potential confounders are appropriately accounted for, limiting potential bias with respect to the prognostic factor of interest. (e.g., implant dimensions and bone density) | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes |
|
(6) The statistical analysis is appropriate for the design of the study, limiting potential for the presentation of invalid results | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | yes | Yes |
|
Category and situation of the article | 4 ‘‘yes:’’ moderate methodol quality included | 3 ‘‘yes:’’ Moderate methodol quality included | 5 ‘‘yes:’’ High methodol quality excluded* | 5 “yes:” High methodol quality included | 4 ‘‘yes:’’ Moderate methodol quality included | 4 ‘‘yes:’’ Moderate methodol quality included | 3 ‘‘yes:’’ Moderate methodol quality included | 3 ‘‘yes:’’ Moderate methodol quality included | 6 “yes:” high methodological quality included |
|