Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 29, 2025
A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials Published In Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery (MAOS) From
Amanjot Kaur1, Rishi Kumar Bali2, Arun K Patnana3
1Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan India.
Aim:
Analyzing quality of Randomized Controlled trials (RCTs) published in the Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery (MAOS) since inception using Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2.0.
Methodology:
Three authors independently screened and evaluated the RCTs according to Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2.0 based on the exclusion and inclusion criteria. All six domains of the RoB 2.0 tool were analyzed. The assessment of each judgment can be "Low" or "High" risk of bias, or can express "Some concerns."
Results:
"Some concerns" were found in the randomization process (57%), and "low ROB" was evaluated in the second domain (57%), third domain (96%) and fourth domain (53%).In fifth domain, maximum of the articles had shown either some concerns in ROB (49%) or low ROB (45%).Analysis of the overall ROB in the included articles, maximum of the articles (50%) of the articles had shown high ROB followed by articles with some concerns in the ROB assessment (36%) and only 14% of the included article shad shown the low ROB in the RCT methodology.
Conclusion:
The methodological and reporting quality in MAOS journal has a significant room for improvement.
