Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©2013 Baishideng.
World J Meta-Anal. May 26, 2013; 1(1): 16-26
Published online May 26, 2013. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v1.i1.16
Figure 1
Figure 1 Selection of literature.
Figure 2
Figure 2 Forest plots of relative risk. The size of the squares corresponds to the weight of the study in the meta-analysis. Combined relative risk was calculated using the random-effects model. Weights are from random effects analysis.
Figure 3
Figure 3 Forest plots of relative risk sorted by mean age of the study population (A) and by the number of teeth lost defined as representing a case (B). A: The size of the squares corresponds to the weight of the study in the meta-analysis. Combined relative risk was calculated using the random-effects model; B: The studies with definition of 1 means those losing one or more teeth were defined as cases. The size of the squares corresponds to the weight of the study in the meta-analysis. Combined relative risk was calculated using the random-effects model. Weights are from random effects analysis.
Figure 4
Figure 4 Funnel plot of included studies for the evaluation of publication bias.
Figure 5
Figure 5 Subset-analysis according to the precision of studies. Weights are from random effects analysis.
Figure 6
Figure 6 Subset meta-analysis according to smoking status. Weights are from random effects analysis.