Assessment of the quality of reporting observational studies in the pediatric dental literature.

PURPOSE The purpose of this assessment was to evaluate reporting of observational studies in the pediatric dental literature. METHODS This assessment included the following steps: (1) developing a model for reporting information in clinical dentistry studies; (2) identifying treatment comparisons in pediatric dentistry that were evaluated by at least 5 observational studies; (3) abstracting from these studies any data indicated by applying the reporting model; and (4) comparing available data elements to the desired data elements in the reporting model. RESULTS The reporting model included data elements related to: (1) patients; (2) providers; (3) treatment details; and (4) study design. Two treatment comparisons in pediatric dentistry were identified with 5 or more observational studies: (1) stainless steel crowns vs amalgams (10 studies); and (2) composite restorations vs amalgam (5 studies). Results from studies comparing the same treatments varied substantially. Data elements from the reporting model that could have explained some of the variation were often reported inadequately or not at all. CONCLUSIONS Reporting of observational studies in the pediatric dental literature may be inadequate for an informed interpretation of the results. Models similar to that used in this study could be used for developing standards for the conduct and reporting of observational studies in pediatric dentistry.