Skip to main content
Fig. 3 | BMC Oral Health

Fig. 3

From: Is there a rise of prevalence for Molar Incisor Hypomineralization? A meta-analysis of published data

Fig. 3

a Prevalences of MIH in studies reporting on populations with a mean birth year before 1997 The column on the left indicates first author and year of publication. The position of the boxes indicate the mean value for the prevalence of MIH while the size of the boxes indicates their weight in the meta-analysis. Whiskers depict the confidence interval (CI). Means and CI are given in the column on the right. The rhombus indicates the mean (position) and the CI (horizontal extention) of the overall summary estimate. RE indicates a random effects model for meta-analysis. The heterogeneity variance Ï„2 was estimated to be 0.56, I2 was estimated to be 97.7%. b Prevalences of MIH in studies reporting on populations with a mean birthyear from 1997 to 2003. The column on the left indicates first author and year of publication. The position of the boxes indicate the mean value for the prevalence of MIH while the size of the boxes indicates their weight in the meta-analysis. Whiskers depict the confidence interval (CI). Means and CI are given in the column on the right. The rhombus indicates the mean (position) and the CI (horizontal extention) of the overall summary estimate. RE indicates a random effects model for meta-analysis. The heterogeneity variance Ï„2 was estimated to be 0.25, I2 was estimated to be 96.8%. c Prevalences of MIH in studies reporting on populations with a mean birthyear after 2003. The column on the left indicates first author and year of publication. The position of the boxes indicate the mean value for the prevalence of MIH while the size of the boxes indicates their weight in the meta-analysis. Whiskers depict the confidence interval (CI). Means and CI are given in the column on the right. The rhombus indicates the mean (position) and the CI (horizontal extention) of the overall summary estimate. RE indicates a random effects model for meta-analysis. The heterogeneity variance Ï„2 was estimated to be 0.79, I2 was estimated to be 98.8%

Back to article page