Abstract:Orthodontic systematic reviews (SRs) use different methods to pool the individual studies in a meta-analysis when indicated. However, the number of studies included in orthodontic meta-analyses is relatively small. This study aimed to evaluate the direction of estimate changes of orthodontic meta-analyses (MAs) using different between-study variance methods considering the level of heterogeneity when few trials were pooled. Search and study selection: Systematic reviews (SRs) published over the last three years, from the 1 st of January 2020 to the 31 st of December 2022, in six main orthodontic journals with at least one MA pooling five or lesser primary studies were identified. Data collection and analysis: Data were extracted from each eligible MA, which was replicated in a random effect model using DerSimonian and Laird (DL), Paule–Mandel (PM), Restricted maximum-likelihood (REML), Hartung Knapp and Sidik Jonkman (HKSJ) methods. The results were reported using median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous data and frequencies for categorical data and analyzed using non-parametric tests. The Boruta algorithm was used to assess the significant predictors for the significant change in the confidence interval between the different methods compared to the DL method, which was only feasible using the HKSJ method. 146 MAs were included, most applying the random effect model (n = 111; 76%) and pooling continuous data using mean difference (n = 121; 83%). The median number of studies was three (range 2, 4), and the overall statistical heterogeneity (I 2 ranged from 0 to 99% with a median of 68%). Close to 60% of the significant findings became non-significant when HKSJ was applied compared to the DL method and when the heterogeneity was present I 2 >0%. On the other hand, 30.43% of the non-significant meta-analyses using the DL method became significant when HKSJ was used when the heterogeneity was absent I 2 = 0%. Orthodontic MAs with few studies can produce different results based on the between-study variance method and the statistical heterogeneity level. Compared to DL, HKSJ method is overconservative when I 2 is greater than 0% and may result in false positive findings when the heterogeneity is absent.

A gentle introduction to network meta-analysis for orthodontists

Network meta-analysis made simple: a composite likelihood approach

Network meta-analysis: a powerful tool for clinicians, decision-makers, and methodologists

Understanding network meta-analysis methodology for the ophthalmologist

A review and comparison of arm-based versus contrast-based network meta-analysis for binary outcomes-Understanding their differences and limitations

Impact of various aligner auxiliaries on orthodontic activity: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Twenty years of network meta‐analysis: Continuing controversies and recent developments

Understanding Network Meta‐Analysis: A Practical Introduction for Nurses

Progress and Challenges of Network Meta‐analysis

A multilevel approach to network meta-analysis within a frequentist framework

Do statistical heterogeneity methods impact the results of meta- analyses? A meta epidemiological study

Bibliometric and visualized analysis of randomized controlled trials in orthodontics between 1991 and 2022

Efficacy and safety of micro-implant anchorage in Angle class II malocclusion orthodontic treatment: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Network meta-analysis: a statistical physics perspective

Biostatistics: essential concepts for the clinician

Sharing information across patient subgroups to draw conclusions from sparse treatment networks

Nonparametric Bayesian Approach to Treatment Ranking in Network Meta-Analysis with Application to Comparisons of Antidepressants

The Influence of Orthodontic Treatment on Periodontal Health between Challenge and Synergy: A Narrative Review

Demographic characteristics of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials in orthodontic journals with impact factor

Network meta-analysis and random walks

Synthesizing cross-design evidence and cross-format data using network meta-regression