Table 3.
Methods used by review authors to incorporate split-mouth RCTs into meta-analyses
|
Review |
Split-mouth and parallel arm RCTs combined |
Standard error of the treatment effect estimate in split-mouth RCTs |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Together | Separately (subgroups) | ||
| 1. Annibali
[18] |
Yes |
Yes |
Imputed using Follmann
[13], with the appropriate data not presented |
| 2. Atieh
[19] |
Yes |
No |
Not clear |
| 3. Brignardello-Petersen
[20] |
Yes |
Yes |
Within-patient correlation assumed equal to 0 |
| 4. Cairo
[21] |
Yes |
No |
Imputed using Follmann
[13], with the appropriate data not presented |
| 5. Carrasco-Labra
[22] |
Yes |
Yes |
Imputed using Follmann
[13], with the appropriate data not presented. Within-patient correlation assumed equal to 0.75 |
| 6. Chambronne
[23] |
Yes |
Yes |
Imputed using Follmann
[13], with the appropriate data not presented |
| 7. Del Fabbro
[24] |
Yes |
No |
Not clear |
| 8. Esposito
[25] |
Yes |
No |
Imputed using Follmann
[13], with the appropriate data not presented |
| 9. Esposito
[26] |
Yes |
Yes |
Imputed using Follmann
[13], with the appropriate data not presented. Within-patient correlation assumed equal to 0.25 (median ICC in similar review, Needleman
[33]) |
| 10. Esposito
[27] |
Yes |
No |
Imputed using Follmann
[13], with the appropriate data not presented |
| 11. Fleming
[28] |
Yes |
No |
Calculated using Borenstein
[16] |
| 12. Imai
[29] |
Yes |
No |
Not clear |
| 13. Lodi
[30] |
Yes |
No |
Not clear |
| 14. Mickenautsch
[31] |
Yes |
No |
Not clear |
| 15. Muller-Bolla
[32] |
Yes |
No |
Not clear |
| 16. Needleman
[33] |
Yes |
Yes |
Imputed using Follmann
[13], with the appropriate data not presented. Within-patient correlation assumed equal to 0.25 |
| 17. Sgolastra
[35] |
Yes |
No |
Not clear |
| 18. Yong [36] | Yes | No | Not clear |