Two people, working independently, were involved in the selection process. No subsequent papers relating to small leaf width comparison was found until end of February 2017. The last search was performed on 31st December 2015. Posters and presentations were not considered because they were not subjected to a peer review approach and, therefore, they have an uncertain level of evidence, in agreement with PRISMA guidelines. If they could not be calculated, then the paper was not included in the review. The data included in the selected publications were collected and the necessary statistical data (such as averages and standard deviations) were either used directly or calculated. Published peer-reviewed papers were chosen based on the simple criterion of being a comparison study between different MLC types in terms of conformity index. From the group formed by the above described search, all relevant publications relating to the subject matter (MLC comparison) were selected. In addition, all citations in the originally found papers were checked to identify the existence of any new papers. Further papers were found using Google Scholar ( ). Searches were performed using PubMed ( ), with search keywords “MLC leaf width”.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |