Evidence-based dentistry

steps and methods of a systematic review


  • Lívia Guimarães Zina Centro Universitário Newton Paiva
  • Suzely Adas Saliba Moimaz Universidade Estadual Paulista




Evidence-based practice, Evidence-based dentistry, Epidemiology, Meta-analysis as a topic, Review, Methodology


Evidence-based science uses epidemiological study models with the aim of applying scientific knowledge in health decisions. As such, the present study aimed to describe and discuss Evidence-Based




Dentistry (EBD) and the methodology of systematic reviews, highlighting the steps needed to execute these, such as the formulation of search strategies, the definition of inclusion and exclusion criteria, data abstraction, as well as analysis and synthesis, including meta-analysis. The EBD is understood as an approach to oral health care that requires the integration of scientific evidence with the professional’s expertise and the population’s needs. As a contribution, the EBD has introduced methods which generate evidence of quality, statistical tools used to synthesize and analyze the evidence (systematic reviews and meta-analysis), in addition to ways of accessing (electronic databases) and applying the evidence (evidence-based health decisions). Finally, the evidence-based approach allows for the evaluation of the scientific knowledge through its validity, impact, and applicability, eliminating the gap between research and the reality of health services. It is necessary that efforts continue to be employed in an attempt to stimulate qualitative advances in epidemiological research in the oral health field, in turn helping EBD reach a broader space within the processes of planning and implementation of healthcare actions.


Download data is not yet available.


Claridge JA, Fabian TC. History and Development of Evidence-based Medicine. World J Surg. 2005; 29:547-53.

Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996; 312:71-2.

Cochrane AL. 1931-1971: a critical review, with particular reference to the medical profession. In: Feeling-Smith G, Wells N, editors. Medicines for the year 2000. London: Office of Health Economics; 1979. p. 1-11.

Forrest JL, Miller SA, Newman MG. Introduction to Evidence-Based Decision Making. In: Newman MG, Takei HH, Klokkevold PR, Carranza FA (editors). Carranza’s Clinical Periodontology. 10thed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2006. p. 12-21.

American Dental Association. ADA Policy on evidence-based dentistry. definition of evidence- based dentistry. Chicago: ADA; 2008.

Ballini A, Capodiferro S, Toia M, Cantore S, Favia G, De Frenza G, et al. Evidence-based dentistry: what’s new? Int J Med Sci. 2007; 4:174-8.

Richards D. Which journals should you read to keep up to date? Evid Based Dent. 1998; 1:22-5.

Straus SE, Richardson WS, Glasziou P, Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 3rded. Philadelphia: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone; 2005.

Koepsell TD, Weiss NS. Epidemiologic methods: studying the ocurrence of illness. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.

Hujoel PP. Assessing evidence. In: Newman MG, Takei HH, Klokkevold PR, Carranza FA, editors. Carranza’s clinical periodontology. 10thed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2006. p. 22-35.

Khan KS, Riet G, Glanville J, Sowden AJ, Kleijnen J. Undertaking Systematic reviews of research on effectiveness. CRD report number 4. 2nded. York: York Publishing Services; 2001.

Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003; 327:557-60.

Armitage P. Statistical methods in medical research. 4th ed. Malden: Blackwell Science; 2001.

Egger M, Smith GD. Bias in location and selection of studies. BMJ. 1998; 316:61-6.

Egger M, Smith GD, Phillips AN. Meta-analysis: principles and procedures. BMJ. 1997; 315:1533- 7.

Olkin I. Statistical and theoretical considerations in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995; 48:133- 46.

Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. [internet]. [updated 2011 Mar; cited 2012 Jan 16]. Available from: http://www.cochrane-handbook. org/.

Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001; 323:42-6.

Lawrence A. Building up the quality process. Evid Based Dent. 1999; 1:2.

Zina LG. Evidências científicas da associação entre fórmula infantil, fluorose e cárie dentária [tese]. Araçatuba (SP): Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba; 2009.

Wolf FM. Meta-analysis: quantitative methods for research synthesis. Beverly Hills (CA): Sage; 1986.

DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7:177-88.

Rosner BA. Fundamentals of biostatistics. Belmont, London: Duxbury Press; 1995.

Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002; 21:1539-58.

Berkey CS, Hoaglin DC, Mosteller F, Colditz GA. A random-effects regression model for meta- analysis. Stat Med. 1995; 14:395-411.

Biljana M, Jelena M, Branislav J, Milorad R. Bias in meta-analysis and funnel plot asymmetry. Stud Health Technol Inform. 1999; 68:323-8.

Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel- group randomized trials. Lancet. 2001; 357:1191- 4.

Clarkson J, Worthington H, Chalmers I. Reducing harm and maximizing benefit. Evid Based Dent. 1999; 1:4-5.



How to Cite

Zina, L. G., & Moimaz, S. A. S. (2016). Evidence-based dentistry: steps and methods of a systematic review. Arquivos Em Odontologia, 48(3). https://doi.org/10.7308/aodontol/2012.48.3.10




Most read articles by the same author(s)