RESUMEN

AIMS: To evaluate where orthodontic research papers are published and to explore potential relationships between the journal of publication and the characteristics of the research study and authorship. METHODS: An online literature search of seven research databases was undertaken to identify orthodontic articles published in English language over a 12-month period (1 January-31 December 2022) (last search: 12 June 2023). Data extracted included journal, article, and author characteristics. Journal legitimacy was assessed using a ternary classification scheme including available blacklists and whitelists, cross-checking of indexing claims and history of sending unsolicited emails. The level of evidence (LOE) of all included studies was assessed using a modified Oxford LOE classification scale. Univariable and multivariable ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to examine possible associations between the level of evidence, journal discipline, and authorship characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 753 studies, published by 246 unique journal titles, were included and further assessed. Nearly two-thirds of orthodontic papers were published in non-orthodontic journals (62.8%) and over half (55.6%) of the articles were published in open-access policy journals. About a fifth of the articles (21.2%) were published either in presumed predatory journals or in journals of uncertain legitimacy. Journal discipline was significantly associated with the level of evidence. Higher-quality orthodontic studies were more likely published in established orthodontic journals (likelihood ratio test P < .001). LIMITATIONS: The identification and classification of predatory journals are challenging due to their covert nature. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of orthodontic articles were published in non-orthodontic journals. In addition, approximately one in five orthodontic studies were published in presumed predatory journals or in journals of uncertain legitimacy. Studies with higher levels of evidence were more likely to be published in established orthodontic journals.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Adequate and transparent reporting is necessary for critically appraising published research, yet ample evidence suggests that the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of oral health research could be greatly improved. Accordingly, the Task Force on Design and Analysis in Oral Health Research, statisticians and trialists from academia and industry, identified the minimum information needed to report and evaluate observational studies and clinical trials in oral health: the OHStat guidelines. Drafts were circulated to the editors of 85 oral health journals and to Task Force members and sponsors and discussed at a December 2020 workshop attended by 49 researchers. The guidelines were subsequently revised by the Task Force writing group. The guidelines draw heavily from the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT), Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology, and CONSORT harms guidelines, and incorporate the SAMPL guidelines for reporting statistics, the CLIP principles for documenting images, and the GRADE indicating the quality of evidence. The guidelines also recommend reporting estimates in clinically meaningful units using confidence intervals, rather than relying on P values. In addition, OHStat introduces seven new guidelines that concern the text itself, such as checking the congruence between abstract and text, structuring the discussion, and listing conclusions to make them more specific. OHStat does not replace other reporting guidelines; it incorporates those most relevant to dental research into a single document. Manuscripts using the OHStat guidelines will provide more information specific to oral health research.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing recognition of the importance of research in undergraduate dental education, limited studies have explored the nature of undergraduate research activities in dental schools in the Middle East region. This study aimed to evaluate the research experience of final year dental students from three dental schools in the Middle East. METHODS: A descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted among final-year dental students from three institutions, namely Jordan University of Science and Technology, University of Sharjah (UAE), and Oman Dental College. Participants were asked about the nature and scope of their research projects, the processes involved in the research, and their perceived benefits of engaging in research. RESULTS: A total of 369 respondents completed the questionnaire.  Cross-sectional studies represented the most common research type  (50.4%), with public health (29.3%) and dental education (27.9%) being the predominant domains. More than half of research proposals were developed via discussions with instructors (55.0%), and literature reviews primarily utilized PubMed (70.2%) and Google Scholar (68.5%). Regarding statistical analysis, it was usually carried out with instructor's assistance (45.2%) or using specialized software (45.5%). The students typically concluded their projects with a manuscript (58.4%), finding the discussion section most challenging to write (42.0%). The research activity was considered highly beneficial, especially in terms of teamwork and communication skills, as well as data interpretation skills, with 74.1% of students reporting a positive impact on their research perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: The research experience was generally positive among surveyed dental students. However, there is a need for more diversity in research domains, especially in qualitative studies, greater focus on guiding students in research activities s, especially in manuscript writing and publication. The outcomes of this study could provide valuable insights for dental schools seeking to improve their undergraduate research activities.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to understand the trends regarding the use of artificial intelligence in dentistry through a bibliometric review. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors performed a literature search on Web of Science. They collected the following data: articles-number and density of citations, year, key words, language, document type, study design, and theme (main objective, diagnostic method, and specialties); journals-impact factor; authors-country, continent, and institution. The authors used Visualization of Similarities Viewer software (Leiden University) to analyze the data and Spearman test for correlation analysis. RESULTS: After selection, 1,478 articles were included. The number of citations ranged from 0 through 327. The articles were published from 1984 through 2024. Most articles were characterized as proof of concept (979). Definition and classification of structures and diseases was the most common theme (550 articles). There was an emphasis on radiology (333 articles) and radiographic-based diagnostic methods (715 articles). China was the country with the most articles (251), and Asia was the continent with the most articles (871). The Charité-University of Medicine Berlin was the institution with the most articles (42), and the author with the most articles was Schwendicke (53). PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Artificial intelligence is an important clinical tool to facilitate diagnosis and provide automation in various processes.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) Large-language models such as ChatGPT have become increasingly popular in various fields. However, the impact of ChatGPT on dental research writing has yet to be quantified. This study aimed to assess ChatGPT's usage in dental research writing and discuss potential advantages and challenges. METHODS: Using a bibliometric design, we performed a keyword analysis of specific 'signaling words' indicative of ChatGPT use in the titles/abstracts of 299,695 dental research abstracts indexed PubMed 2018-2024. Statistical comparisons using normalized ratios per 10,000 dental publications compared changes in word frequency before and after the ChatGPT release on November 30, 2022. RESULTS: Before ChatGPT's release, the frequency of abstracts with signaling words was 47.1 per 10,000 papers. After the release, this increased to 224.2 per 10,000 papers, an increase of 177.2 per 10,000 papers (p = 0.014, 95 % CI 53.5-300.7). The word 'delve' showed the most significant usage increase (increased ratio=17.0). CONCLUSIONS: This study is among the first to systematically assess the use of GenAI, specifically ChatGPT, in dental research. We found evidence of the use and growth of ChatGPT in dental research publications. This trend indicates the widespread adoption of GenAI-assisted writing in scientific communication, consistent with other scientific fields. While GenAI can potentially increase productivity and inclusivity, it raises concerns such as bias, inaccuracy, and distortion of academic incentives. Therefore, our findings support the need for clear AI guidelines and standards for academic publishing to ensure responsible use and maintain scientific integrity.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The published literature represents the fundamental basis of any academic specialty, including orthodontics. Orthodontic research outputs provide useful insight into clinical and research priorities, which can help inform future research efforts and resource outputs. In recent years, the need for more patient-reported outcomes in orthodontic research has been highlighted. OBJECTIVES: To identify the most common reported research subjects in orthodontics between 2013-23; (2) identify the main outcomes and types of study design associated with this research, including study design related to patient-reported outcomes; and (3) identify trends in this research activity based upon these findings. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search was performed in a single electronic database (Scopus) to return all indexed publications with relevance to orthodontics published from 2013 to 2023. The 50 most-cited publications per year were then identified. Publication characteristics were extracted using a data collection sheet. Descriptive statistics including frequency distributions were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 14 397 publications were identified. Publications on orthodontic bonding made up 7.02% of all output, followed by materials (5.88%) and tooth movement (5.42%). Subsequent analysis of the most-cited publications per year revealed the most frequently published subjects were aligners (12.5%), orthodontic tooth movement (9.45%), and digital workflow (9.09%), and the most common study designs were in vitro (19.09%) and retrospective observational studies (15.45%). The most common outcome type was morphological features of malocclusion (26.9%). Conversely, patient-focused measures were only reported in 12.7% of studies. CONCLUSIONS: Orthodontic research outputs are dynamic but do show consistent research interest in certain subjects. There is a predilection for the reporting of clinician-focused outcomes; whilst these have some value, more efforts should be focused on conducting rigorous and robust studies that include patient-reported outcomes.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Artificial intelligence is much in the news. One issue is whether it might be a useful tool for dental research. This paper provides ad overview of AI and explores its usefulness in some simple history of dentistry topics, including potential dangers.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

This study assessed the features of the 100 most-cited papers on diabetes mellitus (DM) in dentistry using bibliometric measures. A search of the most cited papers on DM using journals included in the category "Dentistry, Oral Surgery and Medicine" in the Web of Science database up to January 2023 was performed. The complete bibliographic records of the selected papers were exported in plain text or Research Information Systems (RIS) file format. The following bibliometric indicators were collected: title, year, authors, number of citations, mean number of citations, institution, country, continent, study design, journal, impact factor, and keywords. Graphical bibliometric networks were created using the VOSviewer software. The number of citations for the 100 most-cited papers in DM research ranged from 111 to 566. Six papers each had more than 400 citations. Most were observational studies (n = 50) from the United States (USA) (n = 23) and were published in the Journal of Periodontology (30%; n=30). Robert Genco was the most cited author and contributed the most to the top 100 articles (3,653 citations; n = 13). The VOSviewer map of co-authorship showed the existence of clusters in research collaboration. The most prolific institutions were the Universities of Buffalo and Michigan (n = 6 each). "Diabetes mellitus" was the most frequent keyword, with 31 occurrences. In conclusion, the most cited studies that investigated the relationship between dentistry and DM were in periodontology. Observational studies, primarily from the USA, have been the most cited thus far.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to provide visualized knowledge maps to show the evolving trends and key focal points of Class III malocclusion research through a comprehensive bibliometric analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Class III malocclusion research published between 2000 and 2023 was retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. VOSviewer was utilized to count the citation and publication number of authors, institutions, countries and journals. Co-occurrence, co-citation, and cluster analyses and burst detection were conducted using CiteSpace. RESULTS: A total of 3,682 publications on Class III malocclusion were included in the bibliometric analysis. During 2000-2023, both the annual publication count and citation frequency exhibited a gradual upward trajectory, with a noticeable surge in recent years. In terms of production and citation counts of Class III malocclusion research, the core journal is the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. Furthermore, apart from the primary keyword 'Class III malocclusion', 'orthognathic surgery' was identified as keyword with the most frequency. The cluster analysis of cited references reveals that the research focal points have shifted to 'skeletal anchorage' and 'surgery-first approach'. Furthermore, the burst detection identified 'quality of life' as a potential research hotspot since it has recently gained increasing scholarly attention. CONCLUSIONS: The current study provides scholars with the knowledge maps of evolving trends and prominent topics of Class III malocclusion research and a summary of research progress on various priorities during different periods. These findings are expected to provide a valuable guidance to facilitate the future research on Class III malocclusion.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The present bibliometric review analyzed the literature on non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) to explore the current state and propose future research topics. DATA: An electronic search was performed, only full scientific papers published in English were included. SOURCES: A search was conducted of all databases in the Web of Science (WOS) platform for available publications on the topic of NCCLs. STUDY SELECTION: 959 publications were retrieved, and the following data were extracted and analyzed: number of publications, study topics, keywords, study type, authors, affiliations, countries, funding agencies, journals and citations. Articles on NCCLs have been increasing in count, ever since they were first mentioned in the literature. Therapy alternatives account for 628 with few on prevention, and the majority were clinical. Brazil has published the most on NCCLs as well as has the highest number of authors and the most funded articles. The three journals that published the most on the topic were Operative Dentistry, Journal of Dentistry and Clinical Oral Investigations. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study provide a full picture of the current literature on NCCLs, research trends, knowledge gaps, and areas requiring further investigation. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: By highlighting evolving treatment strategies and potential gaps in prevention, researchers can contribute to the advancement of clinical practice. This can improve patient care and outcomes in the management of NCCLs, while also providing valuable insights for policymakers to prioritize research funding and policy initiatives.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To record the proportion of data sharing reporting in terms of primary data and/or statistical code of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), published across 12 high impact journals in Dentistry, covering 6 specialty domains. Associations with certain journal, publication and outcome characteristics were examined. Transparency indicators such as registration or funding statements were assessed. METHODS: We identified and included all RCTs published from January 1st, 2017 to December 31st, 2023 in journals of high impact of the following domains: Periodontology, Endodontics, Restorative Dentistry/Prosthodontics, Orthodontics, Pediatric Dentistry, Oral/Maxillofacial Surgery. The primary outcome was the proportion of RCTs reporting their intent to share or openly shared primary data and we tested for associations with potential predictors. Funding, registration, and statistical code/script sharing practices were also examined. RESULTS: A total of 752 RCTs were included, of which only 119 (15.8%) either openly provided their data or included a statement of intention to share upon request. Only one study openly provided the statistical code underlying the analysis used. RCTs in periodontology more frequently included statements about positive intent to share (57/210;27.1%), followed by Orthodontics (35/157;22.3%). Significant effects of year, dentistry domain and continent of authorship on data sharing practices were identified (p < 0.001 in all cases). There was evidence that registered RCTs had 2.04 times higher odds for intention to share data (95%confidence interval: 1.06, 3.92;p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, in oral health RCTs, empirical evidence suggested very low prevalence of positive data sharing practices. Enhancing transparency is pivotal in promoting reproducibility and credibility of research findings. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The findings of this empirical report bring attention to key transparency indicators in randomized controlled trials. These largely impact on the credibility and reproducibility of the evidence base for clinical decision making.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: This bibliometric analysis evaluated the top 100 most-cited articles on the application of quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) technology in caries research. DATA: The following data were collected: title, authors, country, institution, citations count, title and year of article, study design, topic and keywords. Networks among authors and keywords were constructed by VOSviewer software. SOURCES: Scopus database on April 25, 2024. STUDY SELECTION: A global citation score of 4633 (average 46.33 citations) was calculated with publication years ranged from 1999 to 2020. Caries Research emerged as the top contributing journal. Pretty IA was the most prolific author (18 %). United Kingdom had the highest number of most-cited papers (32 %), followed by Netherlands and USA (20 % each). Laboratory studies constituted the predominant study design (45 %), followed by randomized clinical trials (20 %) and non-systematic reviews (11 %). The keywords "dental caries" and "fluorescence" had 81 and 79 occurrences, respectively. The main topic was QLF use for caries detection (45 %). CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides an update summary of the scientific impact of QLF technology application in caries research. QLF has gained increasing attention worldwide, accompanied by a consistent rise in scientific investigations exploring its application in caries research. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The findings offer valuable insights into the most influential articles in QLF technology for caries assessment, serving as a critical resource for researchers, clinicians, and students. Understanding the trends in this field can aid in informed decision-making and the advancement of evidence-based practices in caries management and prevention.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIM: To conduct a scientometric analysis on black stains, and dental caries, with a focus on identifying emergent patterns, collaborative networks, and thematic evolution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive, observational study was conducted using a scientometric approach. The Scopus database was utilized for literature search, selecting articles published between 1976 and 2023. The literature search was carried out on February 8, 2024, using AND and OR Boolean operators which were adapted to the search strategy. Finally, SciVal used different scientometric indicators such as "Scholarly Output", "Views Count", "Field-Weighted Citation Impact" and the "Citation Count". RESULTS: A total of 13 documents from 10 different sources were analyzed, covering a period from 1976 to 2023. Despite an annual growth rate of 0%, each document has an average of 21.08 citations, indicating their relevance in the field. The documents have an average age of 12.9 years and contain 336 references. A total of 143 additional keywords and 26 author keywords were identified. The documents were written by 62 different authors, with an average of 5 coauthors per document and 30.77% international coauthorships. CONCLUSION: The results indicate a significant relevance of the documents in the field, a notable collaboration among authors, and a significant thematic evolution in the research topics. The mentioned institutions and sources produced documents with notable results, indicating a significant interest and impact in the field. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study provides a detailed view of the trends and patterns in the research of dental caries and black stains. The findings can assist dental health professionals in better understanding the prevalence and impact of these conditions. Furthermore, it can guide future research and treatment strategies in this field. How to cite this article: Mayta-Tovalino F, Espinoza-Carhuancho F, Reyes-Carmona J, et al. Emergent Patterns, Collaborative Networks and Thematic Evolution on Black Stain and Dental Caries: A Scientometric Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(4):326-330.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIM: To describe the bibliometric characteristics of the state of scientific production on dental caries during pregnancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A bibliometric study with a sample of 408 publications indexed in the Scopus database, which were selected based on a search strategy that included logical operators and the term MESH. The Scival tool was used to analyze the metadata. RESULTS: Jamieson Lisa Marie is positioned as the author with the most publications, and Schroth Robert as the one with the best-weighted impact (FWCI: 37.7). High-impact journals such as BMC Oral Health, Journal of Dental Research, and BMC Public Health stand out for their productivity and an average number of citations. The United States has a large number of publications and evidence of networks of scientific activity with Australia, Canada, and Brazil. The University of Adelaide leads the production and the work of two Latin American institutions (Universidade de São Paulo and Universidade Federal do Maranhão) stands out. International collaboration has improved during the study period. CONCLUSION: Scientific production on dental caries during pregnancy is increasingly published in high-impact journals, with growing international collaboration. The United States leads in publications, while Australian institutions are the most productive in this field. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Caries during pregnancy is a problem that has an important impact on maternal and perinatal health; thus, its timely management and prevention are important areas of research in the field of oral health. How to cite this article: Muñoz-Hidalgo M, Verastegui-Cabanillas Y, Barja-Ore J. Status of Research on Dental Caries during Pregnancy: A Biometric Exploration. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(4):386-391.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The aim of this review was to map the practice of spin in scientific publications in the dental field. After registering the review protocol (osf.io/kw5qv/), a search was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, Scopus, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and OpenGrey databases in June 2023. Any study that evaluated the presence of spin in dentistry was eligible. Data were independently extracted in duplicate by two reviewers. After removing duplicates, 4888 records were screened and 38 were selected for full-text review. Thirteen studies met the eligibility criteria, all of which detected the presence of spin in the primary studies, with the prevalence of spin ranging from 30% to 86%. The most common types of spin assessed in systematic reviews were failure to mention adverse effects of interventions and to report the number of studies/patients contributing to the meta-analysis of main outcomes. In randomized controlled trials, there was a focus on statistically significant within-group and between-group comparisons for primary or secondary outcomes (in abstract results) and claiming equivalence/noninferiority/similarity for statistically nonsignificant results (in abstract conclusions). The practice of spin is widespread in dental scientific literature among different specialties, journals, and countries. Its impact, however, remains poorly investigated.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Adequate and transparent reporting is necessary for critically appraising research. Yet, evidence suggests that the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of oral health research could be greatly improved. Accordingly, the Task Force on Design and Analysis in Oral Health Research-statisticians and trialists from academia and industry-empaneled a group of authors to develop methodological and statistical reporting guidelines identifying the minimum information needed to document and evaluate observational studies and clinical trials in oral health: the OHstat Guidelines. Drafts were circulated to the editors of 85 oral health journals and to Task Force members and sponsors and discussed at a December 2020 workshop attended by 49 researchers. The final version was subsequently approved by the Task Force in September 2021, submitted for journal review in 2022, and revised in 2023. The checklist consists of 48 guidelines: 5 for introductory information, 17 for methods, 13 for statistical analysis, 6 for results, and 7 for interpretation; 7 are specific to clinical trials. Each of these guidelines identifies relevant information, explains its importance, and often describes best practices. The checklist was published in multiple journals. The article was published simultaneously in JDR Clinical and Translational Research, the Journal of the American Dental Association, and the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Completed checklists should accompany manuscripts submitted for publication to these and other oral health journals to help authors, journal editors, and reviewers verify that the manuscript provides the information necessary to adequately document and evaluate the research.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Adequate and transparent reporting is necessary for critically appraising published research. Yet, ample evidence suggests that the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of oral health research could be greatly improved. Accordingly, the Task Force on Design and Analysis in Oral Health Research-statisticians and trialists from academia and industry-identified the minimum information needed to report and evaluate observational studies and clinical trials in oral health: the OHStat Guidelines. Drafts were circulated to the editors of 85 oral health journals and to Task Force members and sponsors and discussed at a December 2020 workshop attended by 49 researchers. The guidelines were subsequently revised by the Task Force's writing group. The guidelines draw heavily from the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT), Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE), and CONSORT harms guidelines and incorporate the SAMPL guidelines for reporting statistics, the CLIP principles for documenting images, and the GRADE indicating the quality of evidence. The guidelines also recommend reporting estimates in clinically meaningful units using confidence intervals, rather than relying on P values. In addition, OHStat introduces 7 new guidelines that concern the text itself, such as checking the congruence between abstract and text, structuring the discussion, and listing conclusions to make them more specific. OHStat does not replace other reporting guidelines; it incorporates those most relevant to dental research into a single document. Manuscripts using the OHStat guidelines will provide more information specific to oral health research.

Asunto(s)