{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022123893805309734, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.510791366906475, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Meta-analysis for Orthodontists: Part I – how to Choose Effect Measure and Statistical Model

Systematic reviews ideally provide a comprehensive and unbiased summary of existing evidence from clinical studies, whilst meta-analysis combines the results of these studies to produce an overall estimate. Collectively, this makes them invaluable for clinical decision-making. Although the number of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses in orthodontics has increased, questions are often raised about their methodological soundness. In this primer, the first steps of meta-analysis are discussed, namely the choice of an effect measure to express the results of included studies, and the choice of a statistical model for the meta-analysis. Clinical orthodontic examples are given to explain the various options available, the thought process behind the choice between them and their interpretation.