Adequate adoption of evidence-based practice is deeply rooted in accessing methodological quality and completeness of systematic reviews and meta-analyses reporting. Nonetheless, this assumption might be flawed if the methodological quality assessment has not been properly conducted. Taking the former statement into consideration, this correspondence article encourages the improvement of future tertiary manuscripts, especially in the field of restorative dentistry. Thus, this article addresses an overview of reviews in restorative dentistry as an example of evaluating tertiary evidence for increasing the awareness of reviewers, authors, and readers.
No clinical trial protocols linked to this paper
Clinical trials are automatically linked when NCT numbers are found in the paper's title or abstract.PICO Elements
No PICO elements extracted yet. Click "Extract PICO" to analyze this paper.
Paper Details
MeSH Terms
Associated Data
No associated datasets or code repositories found for this paper.
Related Papers
Related paper suggestions will be available in future updates.