Quality of reporting of dental survival analyses

Time-to-event survival statistics in ophthalmology: Methodological research

IMPORTANCE

Understanding the outcomes of interventions over time is essential for clinical decision making in surgical specialties.

BACKGROUND

Analysis of survival time (or time to event) is complicated when loss to follow up occurs. This article explores transparent data analysis methods where missing ("censored") data are present.

DESIGN

Manual search of the top 20 Ophthalmology journals from a recent year of the established literature (2014).

SAMPLES

A total of 4565 articles were identified, of which 218 reported outcomes of treatment over time in humans.

METHODS

Pertinent details to assist the use of Kaplan-Meier and life table actuarial statistics are explained, and criteria that define whether each has high, acceptable or poor quality are explored. The quality of reporting from the literature sample is analysed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Reporting quality of survival curves and life tables from each sampled article is assessed according to the established criteria.

RESULTS

In total, 31.2% of samples (n = 68) presented survival curves, 53.2% (n = 116) presented life tables, 22% (n = 48) presented both, whilst 46.8% (n = 102) presented neither; 2% of survival curves and 13% of life tables were high quality, with quality of life tables significantly better than survival curves (P = .0042). 90.36% (n = 197) of articles reported time to event data which was classified as poor: due to poor analysis of survival curves (n = 50, 43.10%) poor analysis of life tables (n = 45, 66.18%); and complete omission of survival graphics (n = 102, 46.97%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Ophthalmology research that follows patient outcomes over time can be analysed with "time-to-event" statistics, and reported with transparency. This analysis showed that important contextural information was omitted from 90% of ophthalmic studies, and this could impact patient decision making.

Use of Data Analysis Methods in Dental Publications: Is There Evidence of a Methodological Change?

Objectives: To evaluate how data analysis methods in dental studies have changed in recent years. Methods: A total of 400 articles published in 2010 and 2017 in five dental journals, Journal of Dental Research, Caries Research, Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, Journal of Dentistry, and Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, were analyzed. The study characteristics and the reporting of data analysis techniques were systematically identified. Results: The statistical intensity of the dental journals did not change from 2010 to 2017. Dental researchers did not adopt the data mining, machine learning, or Bayesian approaches advocated in the computer-oriented methodological literature. The determination of statistical significance was the most generally used method for conducting research in both 2010 and 2017. Observational study designs were more common in 2017. Insufficient and incomplete descriptions of statistical methods were still a serious problem. Conclusion: The stabilization of statistical intensity in the literature suggests that papers applying highly computationally complex data analysis methods have not meaningfully contributed to dental research or clinical care. Greater rigor is required in reporting the methods in dental research articles, given the current pervasiveness of failure to describe the basic techniques used.

How do we incorporate patient views into the design of healthcare services for older people: a discussion paper

Background

Across the European Union costs for the treatment of oral disease is expected to rise to €93 Billion by 2020 and be higher than those for stroke and dementia combined. A significant proportion of these costs will relate to the provision of care for older people. Dental caries severity and experience is now a major public health issue in older people and periodontal disease disproportionately affects older adults. Poor oral health impacts on older people’s quality of life, their self-esteem, general health and diet. Oral health care service provision for older people is often unavailable or poor, as is the standard of knowledge amongst formal and informal carers. The aim of this discussion paper is to explore some of the approaches that could be taken to improve the level of co-production in the design of healthcare services for older people.

Main text

People’s emotional and practical response to challenges in health and well-being and the responsiveness of systems to their needs is crucial to improve the quality of service provision. This is a particularly important aspect of care for older people as felt, expressed and normative needs may be fundamentally different and vary as they become increasingly dependent. Co-production shifts the design process away from the traditional ‘top-down’ medical model, where needs assessments are undertaken by someone external to a community and strategies are devised that encourage these communities to become passive recipients of services. Instead, an inductive paradigm of partnership working and shared leadership is actively encouraged to set priorities and ultimately helps improve the translational gap between research, health policy and health-service provision.

Discussion

The four methodological approaches discussed in this paper (Priority Setting Partnerships, Discrete Choice Experiments, Core Outcome Sets and Experience Based Co-Design) represent an approach that seeks to better engage with older people and ensure an inductive, co-produced process to the research and design of healthcare services of the future. These methods facilitate partnerships between researchers, healthcare professionals and patients to produce more responsive and appropriate public services for older people.

Lost in translation: Review of identification bias, translation bias and research waste in dentistry

OBJECTIVE

To review how articles are retrieved from bibliographic databases, what article identification and translation problems have affected research, and how these problems can contribute to research waste and affect clinical practice.

METHODS

This literature review sought and appraised articles regarding identification- and translation-bias in the medical and dental literature, which limit the ability of users to find research articles and to use these in practice.

RESULTS

Articles can be retrieved from bibliographic databases by performing a word or index-term (for example, MeSH for MEDLINE) search. Identification of articles is challenging when it is not clear which words are most relevant, and which terms have been allocated to indexing fields. Poor reporting quality of abstracts and articles has been reported across the medical literature at large. Specifically in dentistry, research regarding time-to-event survival analyses found the allocation of MeSH terms to be inconsistent and inaccurate, important words were omitted from abstracts by authors, and the quality of reporting in the body of articles was generally poor. These shortcomings mean that articles will be difficult to identify, and difficult to understand if found. Use of specialized electronic search strategies can decrease identification bias, and use of tailored reporting guidelines can decrease translation bias. Research that cannot be found, or cannot be used results in research waste, and undermines clinical practice.

SIGNIFICANCE

Identification- and translation-bias have been shown to affect time-to-event dental articles, are likely affect other fields of research, and are largely unrecognized by authors and evidence seekers alike. By understanding that the problems exist, solutions can be sought to improve identification and translation of our research.