Research waste is highly prevalent across biomedical investigations. We aimed to assess the evidence on the extent of research waste in dental research. We performed a scoping review of empirical evaluations of dental studies assessing the prevalence and impact of limitations in design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of research. PubMed was searched using specific terms to retrieve studies dealing with design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of studies in dentistry, with no year or language restrictions. Of the 1,807 publications identified from the search and from manual searches, 71 were included in this review. The topic and article selection was based on the expert opinion of the authors. The existing evidence suggests that, although there are improvements over time, substantial deficiencies in all areas (design, conduct, analysis, reporting) were prevalent in dental research publications. Waste in research is a multifaceted problem without a simple solution. However, an appreciation of optimal research design and execution is a prerequisite and should be underpinned by policies that include appropriate training in research methods and properly aligned incentives.
AbdulraheemSBondemarkL.2019. The reporting of blinding in orthodontic randomized controlled trials: where do we stand?Eur J Orthod. 41(1):54–58.
2.
AlamriHMAlharbiF.2018. Quality assessment of randomized clinical trials reporting in endodontic journals: an observational study from 2012 to 2017. J Endod. 44(8):1246–1250.
3.
BeyariMMHakALiCSLamfonHA. 2014. Conflict of interest reporting in dentistry randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. J Evid-Based Dent Pract. 14(4):158–164.
4.
BeyariMMStrainDLiCSLamfonHA. 2014. Conflict of interest reporting in dentistry meta-analyses: a systematic review. J Clin Exp Dent. 6(3):e280–e285.
5.
BondemarkLAbdulraheemS.2018. Intention to treat (ITT) analysis as reported in orthodontic randomized controlled trials-evaluations of methodology and recommendations for the accurate use of ITT analysis and handling dropouts. Eur J Orthod. 40(4):409–413.
6.
Brignardello-PetersenRCarrasco-LabraAYanineNUlloaCArayaIPintorFVillanuevaJCornejo-OvalleM.2013. Positive association between conflicts of interest and reporting of positive results in randomized clinical trials in dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 144(10):1165–1170.
7.
ChenJLiZLiuBGanXLiCYuH.2018. Quality improvement in randomized controlled trial abstracts in prosthodontics since the publication of CONSORT guideline for abstracts: a systematic review. J Dent. 74:23–29.
8.
Dos SantosMBFAgostiniBAde MoraesRRSchwendickeFSarkis-OnofreR.2019. Industry sponsorship bias in clinical trials in implant dentistry: systematic review and meta-regression. J Clin Periodontol. 46(4):510–519.
9.
DumbrigueHBAl-BayatMINgCCHWakefieldCW. 2006. Assessment of bias in methodology for randomized controlled trials published on implant dentistry. J Prosthodont Off J Am Coll Prosthodont. 15(4):257–263.
10.
DumbrigueHBDumbrigueDCDumbrigueECChingbingyongMI. 2019a. Bias: a 30-year review of randomized controlled trials published in three prosthodontic journals. J Prosthodont. 28(6):656–658.
11.
DumbrigueHBDumbrigueECDumbrigueDCChingbingyongMI. 2019b. Reporting of sample size parameters in randomized controlled trials published in prosthodontic journals. J Prosthodont. 28(2):159–162.
12.
DumbrigueHBJonesJSEsquivelJF. 2001. Control of bias in randomized controlled trials published in prosthodontic journals. J Prosthet Dent. 86(6):592–596.
13.
ElangovanSPrakasamSGajendrareddyPAllareddyV.2016. A risk of bias assessment of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on periodontal regeneration published in 2013. J Evid-Based Dent Pract. 16(1):30–40.
14.
FerreiraCALoureiroCASSaconatoHAtallahAN. 2011. Assessing the risk of bias in randomized controlled trials in the field of dentistry indexed in the LILACS (Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde) database. Sao Paulo Med J Rev Paul Med. 129(2):85–93.
15.
FlemingPSBuckleyNSeehraJPolychronopoulouAPandisN.2012. Reporting quality of abstracts of randomized controlled trials published in leading orthodontic journals from 2006 to 2011. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 142(4):451–458.
16.
FlemingPSKoletsiDPolychronopoulouAEliadesTPandisN.2013. Are clustering effects accounted for in statistical analysis in leading dental specialty journals?J Dent. 41(3):265–270.
17.
GargonEGorstSLHarmanNLSmithVMatvienko-SikarKWilliamsonPR. 2018. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: 4th annual update to a systematic review of core outcome sets for research. PLoS One. 13(12):e0209869.
18.
GratsiaSKoletsiDFlemingPSPandisN.2019a. Statistical testing against baseline in orthodontic research: a meta-epidemiologic study. Eur J Orthod. 41(2):165–171.
19.
GratsiaSKoletsiDFlemingPSPandisN.2019b. A priori power considerations in orthodontic research: a 3 year meta-epidemiologic study. Eur J Orthod. cjz061.
20.
HoldenACLSpallekH.2018. Looking gift-horses in the mouth: gift-giving, incentives and conflict of interest in the dental profession. J Law Med. 25(3):794–799.
21.
HuaFWalshTGlennyAMWorthingtonH.2016a. Thirty percent of abstracts presented at dental conferences are published in full: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 75:16–28.
22.
HuaFWalshTGlennyAMWorthingtonH.2016b. Surveys on reporting guideline usage in dental journals. J Dent Res. 95(11):1207–1213.
23.
IoannidisJP.2016. Why most clinical research is not useful. PLoS Med. 13(6):e1002049.
24.
IoannidisJPGreenlandSHlatkyMAKhouryMJMacleodMRMoherDSchulzKFTibshiraniR.2014. Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet. 383(9912):166–175.
25.
KagerekiEGakonyoJSimilaH.2016. Significance bias: an empirical evaluation of the oral health literature. BMC Oral Health. 16(1):53.
26.
KimJSJKimD-KHongSJ. 2011. Assessment of errors and misused statistics in dental research. Int Dent J. 61(3):163–167.
27.
KiriakouJPandisNFlemingPSMadianosPPolychronopoulouA.2013. Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in leading oral implantology journals. J Dent. 41(12):1181–1187.
28.
KoletsiDFlemingPSBehrentsRGLynchCDPandisN.2017. The use of tailored subheadings was successful in enhancing compliance with CONSORT in a dental journal. J Dent. 67:66–71.
29.
KoletsiDFlemingPSSeehraJBagosPGPandisN.2014. Are sample sizes clear and justified in RCTs published in dental journals?PLoS One. 9(1):e85949.
30.
KoletsiDKaragianniAPandisNMakouMPolychronopoulouAEliadesT.2009. Are studies reporting significant results more likely to be published?Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 136(5):632.e1–e5; discussion 632–633.
31.
KoletsiDMadaharAFlemingPSPandisN.2015. Statistical testing against baseline was common in dental research. J Clin Epidemiol. 68(7):776–781.
32.
KoletsiDPandisNFlemingPS. 2014. Sample size in orthodontic randomized controlled trials: are numbers justified?Eur J Orthod. 36(1):67–73.
33.
KoletsiDPandisNPolychronopoulouAEliadesT.2012a. Mislabeling controlled clinical trials (CCTs) as “randomized clinical trials (RCTs)” in dental specialty journals. J Evid-Based Dent Pract. 12(3):124–130.
34.
KoletsiDPandisNPolychronopoulouAEliadesT.2012b. What’s in a title? An assessment of whether randomized controlled trial in a title means that it is one. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop Off Publ Am Assoc Orthod Its Const Soc Am Board Orthod. 141(6):679–685.
35.
KoletsiDPandisNPolychronopoulouAEliadesT.2012c. Does published orthodontic research account for clustering effects during statistical data analysis?Eur J Orthod. 34(3):287–292.
36.
KoufatzidouMKoletsiDFlemingPSPolychronopoulouAPandisN.2019. Outcome reporting discrepancies between trial entries and published final reports of orthodontic randomized controlled trials. Eur J Orthod. 41(3):225–230.
37.
LeeDJ. 2011. Research in prosthodontics: a 10-year observation of trends in topics, collaboration, and funding. Int J Prosthodont. 24(5):473–478.
38.
LeeKCChuangSK. 2020. Financial conflicts of interest in dentistry: how much money do providers receive from industry?Gen Dent. 68(1):56–60.
39.
LieberRPandisNFaggionCM. 2020. Reporting and handling of incomplete outcome data in implant dentistry: a survey of randomized clinical trials. J Clin Periodontol. 47(2):257–266.
40.
LivasCKouskouraTRenYKatsarosCPandisN.2014. Are claims made in orthodontic journal advertisements evidence-supported?Angle Orthod. 85(2):184–188. doi:10.2319/040814-258.1.
41.
MadhavjiAAraujoEAKimKBBuschangPH. 2011. Attitudes, awareness, and barriers toward evidence-based practice in orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 140(3):309–16.e2.
42.
NeedlemanIChinSO’BrienTPetrieADonosN.2012. Systematic review of outcome measurements and reference group(s) to evaluate and compare implant success and failure. J Clin Periodontol. 39 Suppl12:122–132.
43.
NieminenPSipiläKTakkinenH-MRenkoMRisteliL.2007. Medical theses as part of the scientific training in basic medical and dental education: experiences from Finland. BMC Med Educ. 7(1):51.
44.
OuzzaniMHammadyHFedorowiczZElmagarmidA.2016. Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 5(1):210. doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4.
45.
PandisNPolychronopoulouAEliadesT.2010. An assessment of quality characteristics of randomised control trials published in dental journals. J Dent. 38(9):713–721.
46.
PandisNPolychronopoulouAMadianosPMakouMEliadesT.2011. Reporting of research quality characteristics of studies published in 6 major clinical dental specialty journals. J Evid-Based Dent Pract. 11(2):75–83.
47.
PapageorgiouSNAntonoglouGNMartinCEliadesT.2019. Methods, transparency and reporting of clinical trials in orthodontics and periodontics. J Orthod. 46(2):101–109.
48.
PapageorgiouSNKloukosDPetridisHPandisN.2015. An assessment of the risk of bias in randomized controlled trial reports published in prosthodontic and implant dentistry journals. Int J Prosthodont. 28(6):586–593.
49.
PolychronopoulouAPandisNEliadesT.2010. Assessment of publication bias in dental specialty journals. J Evid-Based Dent Pract. 10(4):207–211.
50.
PopelutAValetFFromentinOThomasABouchardP.2010. Relationship between sponsorship and failure rate of dental implants: a systematic approach. PLoS One. 5(4):e10274.
51.
RiceDBRaffoulHIoannidisJPAMoherD.2020. Academic criteria for promotion and tenure in biomedical sciences faculties: cross sectional analysis of international sample of universities. BMJ. 369:m2081.
52.
RøttingenJARegmiSEideMYoungAJViergeverRFArdalCGuzmanJEdwardsDMatlinSATerryRF. 2013. Mapping of available health research and development data: what’s there, what’s missing, and what role is there for a global observatory?Lancet Lond Engl. 382(9900):1286–1307. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61046-6.
53.
RushingDCRushingCJOspinaAMcClureSCummingsN.2018. Publication incidence of abstracts presented at the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons Meeting: 2010 to 2014. J Oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 76(10):2051–2056.
54.
SaltajiHArmijo-OlivoSCummingsGGAminMFlores-MirC.2017. Randomized clinical trials in dentistry: Risks of bias, risks of random errors, reporting quality, and methodologic quality over the years 1955–2013. PloS One. 12(12):e0190089.
55.
Sarkis-OnofreRPoletto-NetoVCenciMSPereira-CenciTMoherD.2017. Impact of the CONSORT statement endorsement in the completeness of reporting of randomized clinical trials in restorative dentistry. J Dent. 58:54–59.
56.
SpanouAKoletsiDFlemingPSPolychronopoulouAPandisN.2015. Statistical analysis in orthodontic journals: are we ignoring confounding?Eur J Orthod. 38(1):32–38.
TsichlakiAO’BrienKBensonPEMarshmanZJohalAColonio-SalazarFBHarmanNLFlemingPS.2020. Development of a core outcome set for use in routine orthodontic clinical trials. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 0(0). doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.05.010. [accessed 2020 Sep 23].
59.
YuanJCCShyamsunderNBaraoVARLeeDJSukotjoC. 2011. Publication bias in five dental implant journals: an observation from 2005 to 2009. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 26(5):1024–1032.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
