A Bibliometric Mapping Study of the Literature on Oral Health-related Quality of Life.

BACKGROUND: Oral health is an indispensable component of overall health, and oral health status significantly influences people's physical, mental, and social well-being. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), an important and widely used dental patient-reported outcome (dPRO), is attracting more and more researchers' attention and interest. This study aimed to analyze and map the existing scientific literature regarding OHRQoL through a bibliometric approach, including a summary of the characteristics of OHRQoL-related publications, the identification of prolific entities, high-frequency keywords analysis, and research trend analysis via periodic high-impact keywords. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in the Web of Science Core Collection to collect OHRQoL-related original research and review articles. After examination and deduplication, the following bibliometric information was extracted from each article: title, abstract, keywords, authors, affiliations, geographic origin (countries/regions), year of publication, journal name, and references. Various scientometric mapping tools including Microsoft Office spreadsheet, VOSviewer, Biblioshiny R-package software, and Scimago Graphica were used to analyze basic bibliometric parameters, leading producers, high-impact keywords, and research trends. RESULTS: A total of 3324 OHRQoL-related articles (3119 original research articles and 205 review papers) were collected, which received 65,704 citations. A total of 9950 authors from 2429 organizations contributed to this body of research. Prolific authors from Europe, USA, Brazil, New Zealand, China, and Canada were identified, and they also centered collaboration clusters in the co-author network. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology was the most prolific journal. Twenty-one keywords with more than 200 occurrences, and 23 keywords with more than 150 occurrences, were identified for publications of 1994-2021 and 2012-2021, respectively. Keyword analysis revealed hot topics such as instrument development and validation, studies targeting children and adolescents, as well as clinical studies in operative dentistry, implantology, orthodontics, and community dentistry. Oral Health Impact Profile is the most commonly used instrument in OHRQoL-related research. CONCLUSIONS: OHRQoL is an impactful topic in dental health care as it is not only useful in dental research and patient-centered clinical outcome measures but also provides valuable guidance in dental public health administration and policy making. OHRQoL-related research presents a dynamic landscape and is expected to continue presenting high productivity and broad application in the future.

Response rates to questionnaire-based studies in the contemporary dental literature: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to investigate what is a reasonable response rate for dental questionnaire-based studies in recent literature and to assess the factors that affect the response rates. METHODS: We used MEDLINE/PubMed to search the dental literature of 2021 (January-October). Two reviewers independently assessed studies eligibility and extracted data using standardized electronic extraction form. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-two studies were eligible, of these a total of 149 response rates were reported from 133 studies, whereas the remaining 39 studies were excluded as they did not report response rates. The median response rate across the included studies was 77% (mean = 70.8%). We found significant negative correlation between the response rate and the actual number of distributed questionnaires (sample size) (r = -0.4127; P < 0.001). We also found an association between the response rate and the area of distribution, e.g., national or international (P = 0.0012). However, a wide variation was observed in the quality of information reported within this review and we did not find clear evidence of association between the response rate and other variables such as questionnaire piloting, number of questions in the questionnaire and the journal impact factor. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this systematic review confirm the association between the response rate and the sample size, where the response rate increases when the sample size less than 300 participants. In addition, a higher response rate could be achieved when the study conducted within the same institution (e.g., university). SIGNIFICANCE: Questionnaire-based research can provide answers to several questions that could not be answered by other types of research related to the field of dentistry, dental health practitioners and students' attitudes and behaviours and more. Questionnaire-based publications can effectively contribute to dental research; thus, dental journals should consider development of a minimum set of guidelines in the reporting of questionnaire-based manuscripts.

Publicación continua: la nueva modalidad implementada por la Revista de la Asociación Odontológica Argentina / Continuous publication: the new modality implemented by the Journal of the Argentine Dental Association

Este año la Revista de la Asociación Odontológica Argen- tina inaugura la publicación continua. Esta nueva modalidad de publicación cuenta con numerosas ventajas, tanto para los autores interesados en compartir sus trabajos como para los lectores, que tendrán la información disponible con mayor rapidez. Se seguirán editando tres números anuales, pero cada uno de los artículos se irá publicando a medida que se complete su edición. En cuanto a la citación, cada artículo contará con un numero único que indica su ubicación en la revista y su correspondiente identificador de objeto digital (DOI) (AU)

This year the Journal of the Argentine Dental Association inaugurates the continuous publication model. This new pub- lication modality has numerous advantages, both for authors interested in sharing their work, and for readers who will have the information available more quickly. The journal will continue publishing three annual issues, but each one of the articles will be published as their edition is completed. Regarding the citation, each article will have a unique number that indicates its location in the journal and its corresponding digital object identifier (DOI) (AU)

El desafío de la publicación científica / The challenge of scientific publication

No disponible

Productividad científica de revistas odontológicas peruanas. Evaluación de los últimos 10 años / Scientific productivity of Peruvian dental journals. Evaluation of the past 10 years

La productividad de una revista evalúa la cantidad de artículos publicados por institución, autoría, nacionalidad, etc. El presente estudio tuvo como objetivo analizar el desarrollo de la producción científica peruana en el área odontológica de 3 revistas (Odontología sanmarquina, Kiru y Estomatológica herediana) en el periodo comprendido entre el 2005 y el 2014. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: Estudio bibliométrico que evaluó los artículos según el Open Journal System de cada revista en un periodo de 10 años de publicación. Se analizaron las variables de productividad por año, calidad de los artículos y principal temática de publicación. RESULTADOS: De un total de 662 artículos, el 41,5% provinieron de la revista Estomatológica herediana, el 28,2% de Kiru y el 30,2% de Odontología sanmarquina (p < 0,05). El 61% correspondieron a estudios observacionales, el 19% a revisiones, el 14,7% a estudios experimentales y un 5,3% fueron ensayos clínicos. El 39,42% de publicaciones correspondieron a las relacionadas con las ciencias básicas, siendo las de mayor prevalencia. CONCLUSIÓN: La mayor productividad fue realizada por la revista Estomatológica herediana; la calidad de las publicaciones correspondió principalmente a estudios observacionales, siendo la mayoría de los artículos relativos a las ciencias básicas

The productivity of a journal assesses the number of articles published by, institution, authorship, nationality, etc. This study aimed to analyse the development of the Peruvian scientific production in the dental area of three journals (Odontología sanmarquina, Kiru y Estomatológica herediana) in the period between 2005 and 2014. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A bibliometric study was designed to assess the articles according the Open Journal System of each journal over a period of 10 years of publication. The variables of productivity per year, quality, and main publishing topic were analysed. RESULTS: Out of a total of 662 articles assessed, 41.5% came from the journal Estomatológica herediana, 28.2% from Kiru, and 30.2% from Odontología sanmarquina (P<.05). There were 61% observational studies, 19% reviews, 14.7% experimental studies, and 5.3% were clinical trials. The most prevalent (39.42%) were articles related to basic science. CONCLUSION: Higher productivity was observed by the journal Estomatológica herediana. The quality of publications corresponded mainly to observational studies, and the majority of articles were related to basic science

Evaluación de las publicaciones de los últimos dieciséis años en la revista de la Asociación Odontológica Argentina: un estudio bibliométrico / Evaluation of the publications of the last sixteen yearsin the journal of the Argentine dental Asociation. a Bibliometric study

Objetivo: evaluar la cantidad, el origen y el tipo de publicaciones incluidas en la Revista de la Asociación Odontológica Argentina (RAOA) en los últimos dieciséis años. Materiales y métodos: Se recolectaron todos los volúmenes de la RAOA publicados entre 2001 y 2016. Se evaluaron y compararon la cantidad y el tipo de publicaciones realizadas, teniendo en cuenta categorías como provincia, país, institución universitaria y especialidad, por medio de la prueba estadística de las frecuencias absolutas y relativas delas diferentes categorías. Resultados: En total, se publicaron 535 artículos, y se observó una tendencia a la disminución en los últimos años. La Endodoncia fue la especialidad que más publicó (25 por ciento), con mayor cantidad de investigaciones científicas y revisiones; mientras que la Patología bucomaxilofacial publicó más casos clínicos. La mayoría de las publicaciones fueron realizadas en el ámbito no universitario. La provincia de Buenos Aires y la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires son los distritos geográficos que más aportes realizaron a la revista. Conclusiones: La RAOA puede ser considerada una base referencial odontológica para el análisis de la actividad científica en el ámbito latinoamericano.

Aim: to evaluate the amount, origin and type of publicationsincluded in the journal of the Argentine Dental Association(RAOA) in the last sixteen years.Materials and methods: All volumes of the RAOA werecollected during 2001 and 2016. The number and type of publicationswere analyzed and compared with the state, country,university institution and specialties from which they wereoriginated, statistically calculating the absolute and relativefrequencies of the different categories.Results: A total of 535 articles have been published,with a decreasing yearly tendency recent years. Endodonticswas the specialty with more published articles, most of themscientific research and reviews, while oral and maxillofacialpathology mainly published clinical cases. The majority ofpublications were made by non-university institutions. Theprovince of Buenos Aires and the city of Buenos Aires mademost of the contribution to the journal.Conclusions: The journal of the AOA can be considereda useful reference for the analysis of scientific production inLatin America.

Expert panels as a reference standard in orthodontic research: An assessment of published methods and reporting.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to investigate the expert panel methodology applied in orthodontics and its reporting quality. Additionally, the relationship between the reporting quality and a range of variables was explored. METHODS: PubMed was searched for orthodontic studies in which the final diagnosis or assessment was made by 2 or more experts published up to March 16, 2015. Reporting quality assessment was conducted using an established modified checklist. The relationship between potential predictors and the total score was assessed using univariable linear regression. RESULTS: We identified 237 studies with a mean score of 9.97 (SD, 1.12) out of a maximum of 15. Critical information about panel methodology was missing in all studies. The panel composition differed substantially across studies, ranging from 2 to 646 panel members, with large variations in the expertise represented. Only 17 studies (7.2%) reported sample size calculations to justify the panel size. Panel members were partly blinded in 65 (27.4%) studies. Most studies failed to report which statistic was used to compute intrarater (65.8%) and interrater (66.2%) agreements. Journal type (nonorthodontic: ß, 0.23; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.54 compared with orthodontic), publication year (ß, 0; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.02 for each additional year), number of authors (1-3: ß, 0.30; 95% CI, -0.13 to 0.74 compared with at least 6; 4-5: ß, 0.18; 95% CI, -0.29 to 0.33 compared with at least 6), and number of centers involved (single: ß, 0.20; 95% CI, -0.14 to 0.54 compared with multicenter) were not significant predictors of improved reporting. Studies published in Asia and Australia had significantly lower scores compared with those published in Europe (ß, -0.54; 95% CI, -0.92 to -0.17). CONCLUSIONS: Formal guidelines on methodology and reporting of studies involving expert panels are required.

Pruebas estadísticas utilizadas en revistas odontológicas de la red SciELO / Statistical methods used in dental journals of SciELO networks

Introducción: El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar las revistas odontológicas de la red SciELO y evaluar los métodos estadísticos utilizados en artículos originales de investigación. Material y método: Se realizó una revisión bibliométrica descriptiva. Fueron incluidos todos los artículos originales publicados en revistas odontológicas indexadas en la red SciELO entre los años 2013 y 2014. La evaluación abarcó 4.262 artículos, y a través de un muestreo aleatorio estratificado por asignación proporcional se seleccionaron 309 artículos. Se evaluó el número y tipos de métodos estadísticos empleados. Resultados: Los métodos paramétricos fuero los análisis estadísticos principalmente empleados. Los más frecuentes correspondieron a las pruebas post-hoc (n= 110) (prueba de Tukey), seguido del modelo lineal (n= 84) y de la prueba t para muestras independientes (n= 29). En cuanto a los métodos no paramétricos, la prueba chi cuadrado de Pearson fue la más frecuentemente utilizada (n= 46), seguida de la prueba KruskalWallis (n= 42) y la prueba U Mann-Whitney (n= 27). La estadística descriptiva se observó en 112 de los artículos analizados. Conclusiones: Los métodos estadísticos más comúnmente utilizados en revistas SciELO del área odontológica fueron las pruebas de estadística inferencial, como post hoc, ANOVA, prueba t para muestras independientes, pruebas de Pearson Chi-cuadrado, Kruskal-Wallis y Mann-Whitney. Esta investigación proporciona una evidencia objetiva de lo que debe ser enseñado para mejorar la comprensión de la literatura dental desde una perspectiva bioestadística. Con esto, además de comprender claramente la información de los trabajos científicos, podríamos tomar mejores decisiones clínicas (AU)

Introduction: The aim of this study was to analyze the SciELO dental journals and evaluate what statistical methods were being used in their original research articles. Material and method: A descriptive bibliometric review was performed. All original articles published in the dental journals indexed in the SciELO database between 2013 and 2014 were included. The evaluation covered 4262 articles, and through a stratified random sampling by proportional allocation 309 articles were selected. The number and types of statistical methods employed were evaluated. Results: Parametric methods were the mainly statistical analyzes employed. The most frequent were the PostHoc tests (n= 110) (Tukey test), followed by one-way ANOVA (n= 84) and the independent-samples t-test (n= 29). Regarding the non-parametric methods, Pearson Chi-Square test was the most frequent (n= 46), followed by the Kruskal-Wallis test (n= 42) and Mann-Whitney U test (n= 27). Descriptive statistics was observed in 112 of the articles. Conclusions: The statistical methods most commonly used in SciELO dental journals were inferential statistics such as Post Hoc tests, ANOVA, t-test for independent samples, Pearson chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis, and MannWhitney U tests. This research provides an objective evidence of what ought to be taught to improve understanding of the dental literature from a biostatistics perspective. With this, in addition to clearly understand what give us the scientific papers, we could take better clinical decisions (AU)