A bibliometric analysis of scientific production in the field of lingual orthodontics

An Analysis of Scientific Research Trends in Oral Implantology Between 2016 and 2022

The present study aims to evaluate the trends of oral implant-related research in design and topics between the range of 2016 to the end of 2022. The electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE via Pubmed. Papers published in Clinical Oral Implant Research, Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, and International Journal of Oral Implantology as well as previously European Journal of Oral Implantology, International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, and Journal of Oral Implantology between January 1, 2016, and December 30, 2022, were retrieved. Articles were classified according to their study design and major subjects. The Joinpoint regression model was used to determine changes in the trends of study designs and topics. Statistical significance was defined as a p-value <.05. A total of 3382 articles were analyzed in this study. In the specified period, in vivo, prospective cohort, retrospective case control, randomized clinical studies in the design and prosthetic complications, peri-implant hard tissue studies in the topic experienced a significant decreasing pattern in the number of published articles as well as the total number of articles. Case reports and series, retrospective cohort, nonrandomized clinical studies in the design and outcomes of implant-related treatment plans, immediate implant placement, and peri-implantitis in the topic experienced a significant decreasing pattern followed by a significant increasing pattern with a turning point between 2017 and 2020. Considering the limitations of this scientific topical trend analysis, it can be concluded that the recent pandemic affected the research path in oral implantology in many ways.

Exploring publications in 3 major orthodontic journals: A comparative bibliometric analysis of two 10-year periods (2002-2011 and 2012-2021)

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to perform a bibliometric analysis examining contributing countries and collaborative networks, authors and collaborative relationships, the performance of the institutions, and cocited journals and references in 3 major orthodontic journals (American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, European Journal of Orthodontics, and Angle Orthodontist) over two 10-year periods (2002-2011 and 2012-2021).

METHODS

In this study, 4432 publications in the first decade and 4012 publications in the second decade were quantitatively analyzed and visualized using visualization software such as VOSviewer (Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands), CiteSpace (Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pa), and Scimago Graphica (SCImago Lab, Spain).

RESULTS

Institutions in the United States had the highest number of publications through the 2 decades, whereas Brazil, South Korea, and China achieved significant improvements in performance in the second decade compared with the first. Closer collaborative networks among scholars were revealed in the second decade. The cocitation analysis of the journals showed that highly cited journals included more professional orthodontic journals in the second decade than in the first decade.

CONCLUSIONS

Bibliometric analysis of publications in 3 major orthodontic journals over two 10-year periods revealed a trend of diversification in countries and institutions participating in publishing, international collaborations, and collaboration networks among authors in the field of orthodontics during the 2 decades.

A bibliometric analysis of the 100 top-cited systematic review and meta-analysis in Orthodontics

OBJECTIVE

This bibliometric study aimed to analyze the citation metrics, journal and author characteristics, and subject domains of the 100 top-cited Systematic Reviews (SR) and Meta-Analysis (MA) in orthodontics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic database search was conducted for SR and MA in the Web of Science on 16th July 2023, without language and time restrictions. Of the 802 hits returned, the 100 top-cited orthodontic articles were shortlisted. They were analyzed for citation metrics, journal characteristics (journal, year of publication, impact factor-IF), author and affiliation characteristics (number, primary and corresponding author's affiliation, and country), study domain, and keywords.

RESULTS

These articles were published from 1996 to 2021 in 20 journals, with an impact factor of 1.9 to 10.5, by 351 researchers affiliated with 104 universities. Their citations ranged from 45 to 344, and 34 poised to be classified as classic (≥ 100 citations). The maximum number of articles was published in the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (n=38), the European Journal of Orthodontics (n=18), and the Angle Orthodontist (n=8). The authors for individual papers ranged from 1 to 10, with 5 being the most common (n=58). Europe had the highest contribution regarding the number of corresponding authors, institutions, and citations. Bone anchorage and orthodontic tooth movement/Biomechanics were the most frequently researched domains (n=11 each). The most common keyword used was Orthodontics (n=19), followed by Systematic Review (n=16) and Meta-analysis (n=9).

CONCLUSION

In general, the top cited SR and MA were published in high-impact orthodontic journals, were multi-authored, and reflected the collaborative work from different universities.

Scientific production of an oral implantology journal: a 5-year bibliometric study

Oral implantology is a science in constant evolution, with a considerable number of articles being published every year in scientific journals. Publications can be analyzed through bibliometric analysis, thus observing the evolution and trends of the articles published in the journal. To evaluate, through bibliometric analysis, the scientific production of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research (CIDRR) and its evolution and trends in the last 5 years (2016-2020).All articles published in CIDRR in the last 5 years were reviewed and classified according to the year of publication, volume, number, the number of authors, demographic data of the first and last author, the geographical scope of the article, the number of affiliations of the authors, research topic, type of study, and study design. The association between these variables and citation counts was also analyzed. 599 articles were analyzed. 77.4% were authored by 4-6 authors, obtaining 78.4% from 1 to 3 different affiliations. Male researchers predominated in both the first and last authorship. China showed the highest number of publications when comparing the origin of the authors' affiliations individually; however, most researchers (40.9%) were from the European Union (EU)-Western Europe area. The most studied topic was the implant/abutment design/treatment of the surface (19.1%). Clinical research articles accounted for 92.99% of the publications, of which cross-sectional observational studies prevailed (21.7%). The presence of articles from the United States of America-Canada and EU-Western Europe was positively correlated with the impact factor. This study revealed an increasing trend in Asian research production, particularly Chinese, whereas production of European origin showed a decrease. Clinical studies increased their relative weight to the detriment of translational ones. A growing tendency in the relative weights of female authors was appreciated. Journal citations were associated with certain study variables.

Evidence and consequences of academic drift in the field of dental research: A bibliometric analysis 2000-2015

The mission of academic excellence has resulted in a science system that incentivises publications within high impact, often basic science journals, and less in application-oriented journals. For the dental research field this so-called academic drift can result in a research portfolio that moves away from research that serves dental healthcare. Therefore, we examined if and how academic drift has changed the dental research field. Web of Science data were used to develop a network map for dental research containing journal clusters that show similar citation behavior. From the year 2000 up to 2015, we explored the intensity of knowledge exchange between the different clusters through citation relations. Next, we analyzed changes in research focus of dental research institutes in seven countries, in dental research, clinical medicine research, basic science, public health research and other fields. Within the citation network, 85.5% of all references in dental journals concern references to other dental journals. The knowledge contribution of non-dental research fields to dental research was limited during the studied period. At the same time, the share of output of dental research institutes in dental research has declined. The research activity of the dental research institutes increased mainly in basic science while the knowledge input from basic science into dental research did not increase. Our findings suggest that the dental research portfolio is influenced by academic drift. This academic drift has increased the disbalance towards basic science, and presents a challenge for the scientific progress in dental healthcare services.

Prolific authorship in orthodontic scientific publishing

OBJECTIVES

To identify the 10 most numerically prolific authors publishing in the field of orthodontics for each year over the last decade (2011-2020), describe the characteristics of these outputs and identify trends in the types of study being published.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Scopus literature search was conducted to identify the 10 most numerically prolific publishing authors in orthodontics for each year during this decade. Number and characteristics of all publications for each author were analysed with descriptive and inferential statistics.

RESULTS

Forty-nine different individual authors were identified who were collectively prolific for between 1-8 years within the assessment decade. These authors published a total of 2025 papers, with a median annual output of 18 papers per year; however, half of these authors published between 15-24 papers per year (range 5-200). Amongst authors, 2 or more collaborated on only 7% of the identified papers. The median number of authors per paper was 5 (range 1-27) with significant variation according to study design (P < .001). The majority of authors originated from Brazil (19.3%), Italy (14.1%) and India (12.7%). Most papers described non-prospective clinical studies (38.1%), case reports or case series (11.1%) and narrative reviews (10.8%). Finally, prolific authors had a smaller annual output when publishing in orthodontic journals (P < .001) and when publishing experimental primary research (P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

A cohort of prolific authors in orthodontics between 2011-2020 was identified. Extreme variation was found in annual output between these authors but case reports, non-prospective clinical studies and narrative reviews predominated.

Ten years of minimally invasive access cavities in Endodontics: a bibliometric analysis of the 25 most-cited studies

Objectives

This study aimed to analyze the main features of the 25 most-cited articles in minimally invasive access cavities.

Materials and Methods

An electronic search was conducted on the Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science ‘All Databases’ to identify the most-cited articles related to this topic. Citation counts were cross-matched with data from Elsevier's Scopus and Google Scholar. Information about authors, contributing institutions and countries, year and journal of publication, study design and topic, access cavity, and keywords were analyzed.

Results

The top 25 most-cited articles received a total of 572 (Web of Science), 1,160 (Google Scholar) and 631 (Scopus) citations. It was observed a positive significant association between the number of citations and age of publication (r = 0.6907, p < 0.0001); however, there was no significant association regarding citation density and age of publication (r = −0.2631, p = 0.2038). The Journal of Endodontics made the highest contribution (n = 15, 60%). The United States had the largest number of publications (n = 7) followed by Brazil (n = 4), with the most contributions from the University of Tennessee and Grande Rio University (n = 3), respectively. The highest number of most-cited articles were ex vivo studies (n = 16), and ‘fracture resistance’ was the major topic studied (n = 10).

Conclusions

This study revealed a growing interest for researchers in the field of minimally invasive access cavities. Future trends are focused on the expansion of collaborative networks and the conduction of laboratory studies on under-investigated parameters.

The 50 most-cited articles on clear aligner treatment: A bibliometric and visualized analysis

INTRODUCTION

Research on clear aligner treatment (CAT) has increased in recent years. In this study, we aimed to perform a bibliometric and visualized analysis to identify and critically assess the 50 most highly cited articles on CAT.

METHODS

Web of Science was selected as a data source and consulted until March 2020 to identify all articles potentially relevant to the analysis. All the eligible articles were collected until 50 manuscripts were listed. Article-based parameters, journal-based parameters, and author-based parameters were registered to perform the bibliometric analysis. Keywords were automatically harvested from the selected articles to implement the visualized analysis.

RESULTS

The search identified a total of 378 articles; the total number of citations of the selected articles varied from 15 to 112. The average number of citations per year varied from 1.15 to 13.83. The predominant study design was clinical (31.7%). Over the 15 journals in which the most cited articles were published, the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics published the majority of those included in the list (14) and also received the greatest number of citations (671). A total of 195 authors contributed to the 50 most cited articles; a significant portion of them (26) were unaffiliated with academic institutions. A total of 184 keywords were gathered from the article list.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of citations on CAT is expected to grow steadily in parallel with the rising number of research projects. The present work identifies the most influential articles on CAT and their characteristics, placing emphasis on the journals, the authors, and the topics addressed.

Scientometric analysis of vital pulp therapy studies

AIM

To present a scientometric analysis of the entire body of scientific publications in the field of vital pulp therapy (VPT) and analyse the research trends and popular topics.

METHODOLOGY

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the Web of Science and Scopus databases on 21 August 2020 to identify all articles related to VPT. The publications were reviewed and basic research parameters were collected, including publication year, patterns of authorship, geographical distribution of scientific productions, journals, h-index, study design and keyword analysis. Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar databases were used for the citation analysis of the ten top cited articles. The data were analysed using VOSviewer and visualized by tables and diagrams.

RESULTS

In total, 1197 VPT-associated items were identified from 64 countries in 176 journals. The majority of papers were published in the Journal of Endodontics. The United States of America was the leading country for number of publications, citations, h-index and collaborations. The distribution of articles based on study design was as follows: basic science (35%), clinical (27%), observational studies (26%) and review publications (12%). The most frequently occurring keywords were pulpotomy, mineral trioxide aggregate, calcium hydroxide and direct pulp capping.

CONCLUSIONS

This scientometric analysis outlines the evolutionary trends and the productivity of researchers and countries in the field of vital pulp therapy. Research output is dominated by basic science articles involving innovative materials published in high impact factor dental journals.

Global Dental Publications in PubMed Databases between 2009 and 2019-A Bibliometric Analysis

The objective of this study was to evaluate the publications in the field of dentistry on the PubMed database over a span of 10 years, from 2009 to 2019. Articles published between January 2009 to December 2019 were searched for in the MEDLINE database via PubMed. Data analysis was done using R-base packages, including the specialized R-packages Bibliometrix and String. For descriptive statistics and sequence charting, SPSS version 23.0 was used. A total of 104,975 articles were extracted, with a total of 153,530 authors in the given time frame. The proportion of articles steadily increased from 2009, plateauing at its peak from 2010 to 2016, and then seeing a decline from 2017 to 2019. Journal articles (60.58%), comparative studies (16.05%) and case reports (10.8%) were recorded as the most reported type of publication globally, accounting for 81.43% of the total documents extracted. All the articles came from 81 countries, with the USA reporting the greatest number of published articles (45,911). Dentistry proves to be a multi-faceted arena and many researchers and authors around the globe are contributing to the burgeoning literature over time.

Global Collaboration in Artificial Intelligence: Bibliometrics and Network Analysis from 1985 to 2019

Purpose

This study aims to explore the trend and status of international collaboration in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and to understand the hot topics, core groups, and major collaboration patterns in global AI research.

Design/methodology/approach

We selected 38,224 papers in the field of AI from 1985 to 2019 in the core collection database of Web of Science (WoS) and studied international collaboration from the perspectives of authors, institutions, and countries through bibliometric analysis and social network analysis.

Findings

The bibliometric results show that in the field of AI, the number of published papers is increasing every year, and 84.8% of them are cooperative papers. Collaboration with more than three authors, collaboration between two countries and collaboration within institutions are the three main levels of collaboration patterns. Through social network analysis, this study found that the US, the UK, France, and Spain led global collaboration research in the field of AI at the country level, while Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates had a high degree of international participation. Collaboration at the institution level reflects obvious regional and economic characteristics. There are the Developing Countries Institution Collaboration Group led by Iran, China, and Vietnam, as well as the Developed Countries Institution Collaboration Group led by the US, Canada, the UK. Also, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (China) plays an important, pivotal role in connecting the these institutional collaboration groups.

Research limitations

First, participant contributions in international collaboration may have varied, but in our research they are viewed equally when building collaboration networks. Second, although the edge weight in the collaboration network is considered, it is only used to help reduce the network and does not reflect the strength of collaboration.

Practical implications

The findings fill the current shortage of research on international collaboration in AI. They will help inform scientists and policy makers about the future of AI research.

Originality/value

This work is the longest to date regarding international collaboration in the field of AI. This research explores the evolution, future trends, and major collaboration patterns of international collaboration in the field of AI over the past 35 years. It also reveals the leading countries, core groups, and characteristics of collaboration in the field of AI.