2012
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.2011.01844.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A bayesian network meta‐analysis on comparisons of enamel matrix derivatives, guided tissue regeneration and their combination therapies

Abstract: Combination therapies performed better than single therapies, but the additional benefits were small. Bayesian network meta-analysis is a promising technique to compare multiple treatments. Further analysis of methodological characteristics will be required prior to clinical recommendations.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
126
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 120 publications
(131 citation statements)
references
References 82 publications
4
126
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…superior to those that could be achieved with open flap periodontal surgery [5][6][7]. More recently, the use of growth factors and enamel matrix proteins has been shown to lead to periodontal regeneration in intrabony defects [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…superior to those that could be achieved with open flap periodontal surgery [5][6][7]. More recently, the use of growth factors and enamel matrix proteins has been shown to lead to periodontal regeneration in intrabony defects [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Each analysis was based on non-informative priors for precision and effect sizes. The lack of auto correlation and convergence were first checked and confirmed by four chains and a 20, 000-simulation burn-in phase; finally, direct probability statements were stemmed from an additional 50, 000-simulation phase [21]. The node-splitting method was employed to determine the consistency between direct and indirect evidences.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Credible intervals are the range of estimated parameters after exclusion of extreme values (38). Different criteria were ranked according to their probability of having the lowest versus the highest odds or differences (39), and the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) line plotted and calculated.…”
Section: Outcome Measures and Statistical Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%