No firm evidence was reached according to trial sequential analysis .
Conclusion There is insufficient data to recommend or refute the use of a specific material .
Structured Abstracts: Do they Improve Citation Retrieval from Dental Journals?
Objectives To assess whether structured abstract s improved the sensitivity , precision and yield of retrieving clinical trials , using electronic search es , for example , MEDLINE , from dental journals . Design Retrospective , observational study . Sample Clinical trials , published in six dental journals . Three that adopted structured abstract s  ( BDJ , CPJ , JO ) and three that remained unchanged ( JDR , EJO , AJODO ) between January 1995 and December 1998 ( extended to December 2002 for the JO ) . Intervention Adoption of a structured abstract format . Control Continued use of a non-structured abstract format . Method A combination of h and search ing and the Cochrane Collaboration Oral H1ealth Group 's Trials Register and /or CENTRAL were used to identify r and omised controlled trials ( RCTs ) and controlled clinical trials ( CCTs ) over the selected time period . MEDLINE was used to identify clinical trials in the selected journals over the same time period . Results There was no significant difference in the sensitivity or yield of clinical trial retrieval in journals with either abstract format over time . However , there was a significant increase in precision in journals that did not change their format ( OR=4.96 ( 95 % CI 1.18 , 20.86 ) but not those that did . There was no significant difference in the sensitivity or yield of clinical trial retrieval either before or after the change in format or precision of retrieval before the change . However , in the later period , the precision of retrieval was significantly better in journals with unstructured abstract s compared to those with structured abstract s ( OR=0.17 ( 95 % CI 0.04 , 0.7 ) . Conclusion The use of a structured abstract format does not improve the sensitivity , precision or yield of retrieval of clinical trials from MEDLINE
No firm evidence was reached according to trial sequential analysis .
Conclusion There is insufficient data to recommend or refute the use of a specific material .