Research group forswears financial ties to firms whose drugs it tests.

C. Holden

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.2652299

IF: 56.9

1989-04-21

Science

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Altmetric and impact analysis of randomized clinical trials in dentistry

Fernanda Lauer,Humberto Alexander Baca Juárez,Luana Dutra de Carvalho,Francisco Wilker Mustafa Gomes Muniz,Rafael R Moraes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105407

Abstract:Objectives: This study investigated altmetrics, citations, and field-normalized impact of dental articles reporting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published within a one-year period. Methods: Data were collected in 2024 from PubMed-indexed RCTs published in 2019. Dependent variables included Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS), PlumX citations, and Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI). Independent variables encompassed article-, author-, and journal-related variables. Adjusted quasi-Poisson regression models were used to assess associations. Point-biserial correlation evaluated the relationship between Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and selected reporting variables. Results: A total of 653 RCTs were included, with periodontology, implantology, and oral and maxillofacial surgery comprising 50.4 % of the sample. Only 28.6 % of the articles reported CONSORT use, 49.6 % pre-registered their protocol, and 68.8 % reported a sample size calculation. Most articles (63.6 %) reported no conflicts of interest, with unclear sponsorship being the most frequent (34.6 %). Regression analyses revealed significant associations for AAS, PlumX citations, and FWCI with various factors. JIF increased AAS by 17 % per unit, PlumX citations by 13 %, and FWCI by 6 %. Protocol pre-registration boosted AAS by 132 %, while mixed or no sponsorship increased PlumX citations by up to 47 %. First author H-index increased PlumX citations and FWCI by 1 % per unit, while first author continent impacted AAS, citations, and FWCI. Weak positive correlations between JIF and both protocol pre-registration and CONSORT use were observed. No significant differences were observed across different dental fields for any metric. Conclusion: An interplay among article-, author-, and journal-related variables collectively influenced the online attention, citations, and impact of dental RCT articles. Clinical significance: Understanding the factors that influence the visibility and impact of dental RCTs can guide researchers in improving the design, reporting, and dissemination of their studies, ultimately enhancing the quality and reach of dental research.
Pharmacology of benzamidine-type thrombin inhibitors.

J. Hauptmann

Abstract:Findings on the pharmacology of derivatives of benzamidine characterized as potent competitive inhibitors of the clotting enzyme thrombin were presented including data on their toxicity. Bis-benzamidines and amidinophenylalanine amides were shown to exert pharmacodynamic effects in intact animals and isolated preparations (hypotension; influence on smooth muscle reactions to serotonin and histamine). Studies with 14C-4-amidinophenylpyruvic acid and 3H-N alpha-tosyl-(3-amidino)-phenylalanine piperidide on the pharmacokinetics in rabbits showed that benzamidine derivatives are suited, in principle, for use as anticoagulants in vivo. Pharmacokinetic properties of individual thrombin inhibitors have to be taken into account in order to reach and maintain adequate plasma levels. The antithrombotic effect of benzamidine-type thrombin inhibitors in animals experiments is directly related to their antithrombin activity.
Bibliometric and visualized analysis of randomized controlled trials in orthodontics between 1991 and 2022

Shuhua Wang,Di Fu,Ling Zou,Zhihe Zhao,Jun Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2023.11.007

IF: 2.711

2024-01-27

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Abstract:Introduction In many evidence-based approaches to orthodontic research, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent authoritative evidence to identify rational therapeutics. This study aimed to perform mappings of bibliometric networks on orthodontic RCTs and summarize visual characteristics between 1991 and 2022. Methods The articles were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection in October 2022 without an initial time limit. Only orthodontic RCTs were eligible. Some bibliometric tools (HistCite, VOSviewer, SCImago Graphica, and CiteSpace) were applied for visualized analysis. Data such as geography, productive institutions, hot articles, journals, authors, references, and keywords were extracted and summarized for analysis. Results A total of 1122 orthodontic RCTs were searched. A total of 4125 authors from 1157 institutions in 65 countries published orthodontic RCTs. The United States (149) was the most prolific country, and the University of Sao Paulo (35) was the most productive institution. The American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (206) was the most popular journal for scholars. The visualization results of keyword co-occurrence identified 5 clusters: (1) tooth movement and auxiliary measures , (2) appliances and oral health, (3) orthodontic discomfort and symptomatic therapy, (4) periodontal disease in orthodontics and health maintenance, and (5) retention and relapse. Conclusions Over the past 31 years, publications and citations on orthodontic RCTs from the Web of Science Core Collection have increased notably across many countries, authors, and institutions. Recently, there has been a significant increase in the attention to orthodontic RCTs that focus on accelerating tooth movement.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Scientific Trends in Clinical Research on Zirconia Dental Implants: A Bibliometric Review

Felice Lorusso,Sammy Noumbissi,Inchingolo Francesco,Biagio Rapone,Ahmad G. A. Khater,Antonio Scarano

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13235534

IF: 3.4

2020-12-04

Materials

Abstract:Background: The clinical use of zirconia implants has been shown to increase steadily due to their biological, aesthetic, and physical properties; therefore, this bibliometric study aimed to review the clinical research and co-authors in the field of zirconia dental implant rehabilitation. Methods: We searched Scopus and Web of Science databases using a comprehensive search strategy to 5 October 2020, and independently paired reviewers who screened studies, and collected data with inclusion criteria restricted to clinical research only (either prospective or retrospective). Data on article title, co-authors, number of citations received, journal details, publication year, country and institution involved, funding, study design, marginal bone loss, survival rate, failure, follow-up, and the author’s bibliometric data were collected and evaluated. Results: A total of 29 clinical studies were published between 2008 and 2020 as 41.4% were prospective cohort studies and 48.3% originated from Germany. Most of the included studies had been published in Clinical Oral Implant Research (n = 12), and the most productive institution was the Medical Center of University of Freiburg. The author with the largest number of clinical studies on zirconia implants was Kohal R.J. (n = 10), followed by Spies B.C. (n = 8). Conclusions: This study revealed that zirconia implants have been more prominent in the last ten years, which is a valuable option for oral rehabilitation with marginal bone loss and survival rate comparable to titanium dental implants.

materials science, multidisciplinary,chemistry, physical,physics, applied, condensed matter,metallurgy & metallurgical engineering
Evidence and risk indicators of non‐random sampling in clinical trials in implant dentistry: A systematic appraisal

Jun‐Yu Shi,Xiao Zhang,Shu‐Jiao Qian,Shi‐min Wei,Kai‐Xiao Yan,Min Xu,Hong‐Chang Lai,Maurizio S. Tonetti,Jun‐Yu Shi,Xiao Zhang,Shu‐Jiao Qian,Shi‐min Wei,Kai‐Xiao Yan,Min Xu,Hong‐Chang Lai,Maurizio S. Tonetti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13571

IF: 7.478

2021-11-19

Journal Of Clinical Periodontology

Abstract:AIM: Analysis of distribution of p-values of continuous differences between test and controls after randomization provides evidence of unintentional error, non-random sampling, or data fabrication in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We assessed evidence of highly unusual distributions of baseline characteristics of subjects enrolled in clinical trials in implant dentistry.MATERIALS AND METHODS: RCTs published between 2005 and 2020 were systematically searched in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Baseline patient data were extracted from full text articles by two independent assessors. The hypothesis of non-random sampling was tested by comparing the expected and the observed distribution of the p-values of differences between test and controls after randomization.RESULTS: One-thousand five-hundred and thirty-eight unique RCTs were identified, of which 409 (26.6%) did not report baseline characteristics of the population, and 671 (43.6%) reported data in forms other than mean and standard deviation and could not be used to assess their random sampling. Four-hundred and fifty-eight trials with 1449 baseline variables in the form of mean and standard deviation were assessed. The study observed an over-representation of very small p-values [<.001, 1.38%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85-2.12 compared to the expected 0.10%, 95% CI 0.00-0.26]. No evidence of over-representation of larger p-values was observed. Unusual distributions were present in 2.38% of RCTs and more frequent in non-registered trials, in studies supported by non-industry funding, and in multi-centre RCTs.CONCLUSIONS: The inability to assess random sampling due to insufficient reporting in 26.6% of trials requires attention. In trials reporting suitable baseline data, unusual distributions were uncommon, and no evidence of data fabrication was detected, but there was evidence of non-random sampling. Continued efforts are necessary to ensure high integrity and trust in the evidence base of the field.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Demographic characteristics of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials in orthodontic journals with impact factor

Georgios Kanavakis,Meghann M Dombroski,David P Malouf,Athanasios E Athanasiou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjv012

Abstract:Introduction: The aim of this study was to explore demographic characteristics of systematic reviews (SRs), meta-analyses (MAs), and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in orthodontic journals with an impact factor (IF). Materials and methods: An electronic search was developed and implemented to identify all the SRs, MAs, and RCTs published in the seven orthodontic journals with an IF. No restrictions were applied regarding language, publication date, or publication status. The initial search generated 1147 articles, which were reviewed by three authors in order to determine if they met the inclusion criteria. Five hundred and fifty-seven articles were included in the final analysis. Type of article, name of journal, year of publication, number of authors, country of origin, and primary affiliation were recorded. Associations between those parameters were tested with the Pearson chi-square test for independence at the 0.05 level of significance. Results: The majority (72%) of this kind of articles published in the orthodontic literature were RCTs, followed by SRs (20.1%) and MAs (7.9%). Approximately 77.2% of all RCTs, SRs, and MAs were published between 2004 and 2013, and 72.9% came from orthodontic departments. More than 80% of all articles were collaborative efforts between three or more authors. Contributions from Asia, South and Central America significantly increased during last decade, while contributions from North America decreased by almost 30%. Conclusions: Most RCTs, MAs, and SRs have been published between 2004 and 2013, indicating a significant improvement of the orthodontic literature during the last decade. Asia, South and Central America have significantly increased their contributions to the high evidence orthodontic literature since 2004.
The 50 most cited articles on soft tissue integration of dental implants: A bibliometric analysis

Yanjie Wang,Lingling Zhang,Bintao Xie,Yanqin Lu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.07.013

2024-08-15

Abstract:Statement of problem: Soft tissue integration helps prevent the bacterial invasion of dental implants, but bibliometric studies on the top 50 most cited articles in the field of soft tissue integration are lacking. Purpose: The purpose of this bibliometric study was to analyze the 50 most cited articles since 1999 to explore global trends and research hotspots. Material and methods: A specific search strategy of the Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science) was devised, and relevant article-based, journal-based, and author-based parameters were analyzed. Correlation analysis was performed (α=.05). Results: The number of citations ranged from 71 to 586. Clinical Oral Implants Research was the most cited journal (1722 citations). Berglundh, Tord was the author with the most publications (6 publications) and citations (957 citations). Dental implants and titanium were the keywords with the highest frequency. Switzerland was the country with the highest number of publications (12 publications). Correlation was found between the publication year and average annual citations (P<.001). Conclusions: This study determined the scientific progress in soft tissue integration. The surface design of dental implant materials is essential for the soft tissue integration of dental implants. Soft tissue integration has been a focus of interest in the past few years, but many experiments still need to be done to improve soft tissue compatibility with innovative materials.
Characteristics and Impact of Randomized Trials on Drugs or Devices in Cardiovascular Medicine

Marco Spagnolo,Claudio Laudani,Antonio Greco,Daniele Giacoppo,Davide Capodanno

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40256-024-00670-4

Abstract:Introduction: Clinical trials, essential for medical advancement, vary significantly in methodology and regulatory pathways depending on the type of therapeutic intervention (i.e., drugs or devices). This study aimed to determine whether the drug or device intervention types influence the impact of randomized trials in cardiovascular medicine. Methods: We analyzed late-breaking randomized controlled trials presented at major cardiology conferences from 2015 to 2021. The primary endpoint was the total number of citations obtained. Secondary endpoints included the number of citations at 1 and 2 years, number of total and 1-year mentions, and several metrics of study conduct and publication. Statistical analysis included tests for comparisons of continuous or categorical variables, based on their distribution, as appropriate. To adjust the results for potential confounders, univariable and multivariable regression models were utilized. Additionally, sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore both the effect of neutral or positive study outcomes on the comparative impact of drug versus device trials and the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the primary endpoint. Results: Of 382 eligible randomized trials, 227 (59.4%) were trials of drugs and 155 (40.6%) were trials of devices. Drug trials had a higher median number of total citations compared to device studies (93 [interquartile range {IQR} 48-137] vs. 82 [IQR 39-192]; p = 0.025). This difference was consistent at 1 and 2 years and was also observed in the number of total mentions and mentions at 1 year. All the metrics of study conduct and publication were similar, except for drug studies being more often stopped prematurely (8.8 vs. 1.9%; p = 0.006). After adjusting for multiple potential confounders, the difference in citations and mentions was no longer statistically significant. However, drug trials remained more likely to be stopped prematurely (adjusted odds ratio = 1.15; 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.28; p = 0.009). Positive study outcomes significantly influenced the number of citations and the likelihood of a trial being stopped prematurely. Conclusions: Drug trials are often stopped early and receive more citations and mentions than device trials. However, these differences are mainly due to factors other than the treatment itself. Studies published simultaneously tend to get more attention, and drug trials with positive results are cited more often than those with neutral results.
What is the impact of patient attributes, implant characteristics, surgical techniques, and placement location on the success of orthodontic mini-implants in young adults? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cristina Valeri,Angelo Aloisio,Giuseppe Marzo,Gianmarco Costigliola,Vincenzo Quinzi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2024.07.013

Abstract:Background: Temporary anchorage devices (TADs) address challenges in traditional orthodontic anchorage like patient compliance and precision, showing significantly improved clinical outcomes, particularly for cases requiring maximum anchorage. Materials and methods: A systematic electronic search was performed in five research databases, focusing on studies published between 2015 and 2023. The ROBINS-I tool from the Cochrane Bias Methods Group assessed the risk of bias. Data analysis included categorical and numerical variables, with categorical variables analyzed using Cohen's method in a random effects model to account for variability. Sensitivity and heterogeneity were evaluated using a 'leave-one-out' approach and the I 2 statistic, respectively. At the same time, publication bias was checked using Egger's test, with findings presented through Forest and Funnel plots. Numerical variables were subjected to weighted regression analysis. Results: Examination of 15 studies involving 1981 patients and 3272 orthodontic mini-implants identified key factors affecting implant stability. Failure rates varied significantly, influenced by factors such as the characteristics and insertion site of the orthodontic mini-implants (OMIs), patient-specific variables, and operator experience. Notably, the insertion site and implant characteristics like size did not significantly affect failure rates, but there was a negative correlation between the magnitude of force applied and failure rates. Conclusion: The success of orthodontic mini-implants is broadly consistent across patient demographics and is not significantly impacted by gender or age, though failure rates were higher in males and when implants were placed in the maxilla. These findings suggest that higher applied forces might reduce failure rates. Clinical significance: This review underlines mini-implant efficacy across varied patient demographics, emphasizing the importance of site selection, jaw location, and force application in enhancing success rates and guiding tailored treatment strategies.PROSPERO ID CRD42023411955.
Reporting of sample size parameters for randomized controlled trials published in high impact factor endodontic journals in the last decade: A bibliometric analysis

Fahad Umer,Zainab Haji,Shizrah Jamal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/sej.sej_216_20

2021-09-04

Saudi Endodontic Journal

Abstract:Introduction: Analysis of journals helps in identifying areas of improvement in the respective field as an author/reviewer. The aim of the present study was to report the parameters used in sample size calculations for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in Journal of Endodontics (JOE) and International Endodontic Journal (IEJ) in the last decade. Materials and Methods : A Medline search retrieved all published RCTs in JOE and IEJ from the last decade. The searche was limited to RCTs studies published in english language from January 01, 2010 to April 31, 2020 having enrolled human participants. Articles were reviewed for description of method used to calculate sample size and reporting of parameters i.e. (level of significance, power, effect size, and variance) used for sample size calculation. The data were statistically analyzed. Results: Sample size was mentioned in 94.5% of all articles. Alpha was reported in 81.6% followed by power, effect size, and variance as 67.3%, 57.1%, and 11.5%, respectively. Only 8.7% articles explicitly reported all four parameters of sample size. Conclusion: The reporting of sample size calculation parameters for RCTs was inconsistent. Authors, editors, and reviewers need to increase the reporting of adequate sample size parameters to make the results of RCTs more robust for clinical applications.
Spin in the Abstracts of Randomized Controlled Trials in Oral Implantology: A Cross‐sectional Analysis

Xinyu Wu,Qi Yan,Fang Hua,Bin Shi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.51_13644

2020-01-01

Clinical Oral Implants Research

Abstract:Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) hold high position in the evidence pyramid of Evidence-Based Medicine. Abstracts of RCTs provide a quick overview of the trials and readers decide whether to read the full-texts based on abstracts. For many clinicians, clinical decision making is based solely on RCT abstracts due to lack of time or limited access to full-texts. Spin means a distorted interpretation of study results or conclusions to make the results or conclusions more favorable. Aim/Hypothesis: To investigate the presence and characteristics of spin in abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in oral implantology, and to explore its associated factors and influence on the subsequent literature. Materials and Methods: PubMed was searched to identify with NO-significant primary outcomes in oral implantology published from 2017 to 2019. Spin in abstracts was assessed and categorized according to pre-determined spin strategies. The associations between study characteristics and the presence of spin were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. Articles citing the RCTs with spin were assessed to explore if there was inappropriate citation. Results: Overall, 147 abstracts were included, 100 (68.0%) of which had spin. The main spin strategies in result and conclusion section were focusing on secondary outcomes (10.9%) and focusing on within group comparisons (28.6%), respectively. Abstracts of multi-centers RCTs were less likely to present spin (OR = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.10-0.79; P = 0.015). The mean frequency of inappropriate citation was 0.31 (0.59, 0.41 and 0, in 2017, 2018 and 2019, respectively). Conclusions and Clinical Implications: The frequency of spin is relatively high among published RCT abstracts in oral implantology. Appropriate interpretation of study results in abstracts should be emphasized. Researchers, editors and peer reviewers should make concerted efforts to improve abstract reporting and avoid spin. Clinicians should not base their decision making on abstracts alone. Keywords: spin, randomized controlled trial, oral implantology, abstracts, full-texts
The impact of gender on citation rates: An observational study on the most cited dental articles

Laura Barreto Moreno,Ketlen da Silva Conde,Marina Christ Franco,Maximiliano Sérgio Cenci,Anelise Fernandes Montagner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104606

Abstract:Objective: This cross-sectional study aims to determine whether the gender of the authors plays a role in the position of authorship within the 100 most cited articles in dentistry. Methods: An electronic search was performed in October 2022 in the SCOPUS database, considering filters by 'subject area' [dentistry], 'document type' [article], and 'source type' [journal]. The search was performed without restriction on the study design, publication yearor language. Information regarding each article was then extracted. The gender of the first and last author was determined by associating their first names with the probability of the name being male or female, using the Genderize database. Comparative evaluation of gender distribution was performed with the Chi-Square test. Results: Articles ranged from 5214 to 579 citations. Included studies were published between 1964 and 2019, with the majority being from journals with the highest impact factors in the field. There were statistical significance differences between the gender distribution of the first and last authors, with a predominance of man in both authorships positions (all p<0.00). Only 15% and 12.6% the most cited papers in dental research presented a woman as first and last authors, respectively. Conclusion: In conclusion, female authors are not as regarded as male authors in prestigious authorship positions in the most cited dental publications, and gender bias can still be considered prominent in the dental research community. Clinical relevance: The findings of the present study indicate that the gender imbalance in citation practices, reported in several areas, also occurs in the field of Dentistry. It is essential that more discussions be raised about gender disparities and about the female presence in the scientific community.
Assessing transparency practices in dental randomized controlled trials

Mayara Colpo Prado,Lara Dotto,Bernardo Agostini,Rafael Sarkis-Onofre

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-024-02316-0

2024-08-24

Abstract:Background: To evaluate transparency practices in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dentistry. Methods: This meta-research study included RCTs in dentistry regardless of topic, methods, or level of detail reported. Only studies in English were considered. We searched PubMed for RCTs in dentistry published in English from December 31, 2016, to December 31, 2021. The screening was performed in duplicate, and data extracted included journal and author details, dental specialty, protocol registration, data and code sharing, conflict of interest declaration, and funding information. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed. We generated maps illustrating the reporting of transparency items by country of the corresponding author and a heat table reflecting reporting levels by dental specialty. Results: A total of 844 RCTs were included. Only 12.86% of studies reported any information about data and code sharing. Protocol registration was reported for 50.36% of RCTs. Conflict of interest (83.41%) and funding (71.68%) declarations were present in most studies. Conflicts of interest and funding were consistently reported regardless of country or specialty, while data and code sharing had a low level of reporting across specialties, as well as low dissemination across the world. Protocol registration exhibited considerable variability. Conclusions: Considering the importance of RCTs for evidence-based dentistry, it is crucial that everyone who participates in the scientific production and dissemination process actively and consistently promotes adherence to transparent scientific standards, particularly registration of protocols, and sharing of data and code.
A Bibliometric Analysis of the 100 Most-Cited Articles concerning Atraumatic Restorative Treatment

Isadora Durante de Souza,Aurélio de Oliveira Rocha,Julia Mulinari,Pablo Silveira Santos,Mariane Cardoso,Carla Miranda Santana

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000541107

2024-09-03

Abstract:Introduction: The present study aimed to identify the 100 most-cited articles concerning Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) through a bibliometric analysis. Methods: The search was conducted in the Web of Science database in December 2023. Scopus and Google Scholar were used to compare the number of citations. The following data were extracted from the articles: title, authors, number of citations, access type, institution, country, continent, year of publication, journal, keywords, study design, and theme. Collaborative networks were generated using the VOSviewer software. Google Trends was used to investigate the global popularity of "atraumatic restorative treatment" research. Results: The 100 selected articles, published between 1996 and 2019, were cited 5,092 times, ranging from 21 to 239 citations. Caries Research (12%) and Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology (12%) published the highest number of articles. Clinical study (52%) was the most prevalent study design. The main theme addressed was restoration longevity (43%). Conventional high-viscosity glass ionomer was the most used restorative material (69%). The country with the highest number of articles was the Netherlands (33%) and Europe was the continent with most publications (38%). The Rabboud University of Nijmegen had the highest number of articles (25%). Frencken JE was the most prominent author (38%). The most common keyword was "atraumatic restorative treatment" (n=60). According to Google Trends, Tanzania was the country that searched the most about ART. Conclusion: The 100 most cited articles on ART were mainly composed of clinical studies focusing on the longevity of restorations and originated in Europe.
Leveraging program analysis for Web site reverse engineering

H. Kienle,H. Müller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/WSE.2001.988794

2001-11-10

Abstract:Web sites are complex and heterogeneous systems, characterized by a large number of employed technologies. Evolving these systems requires the skills of a "renaissance reverse engineer". In order to assist reverse engineers in their efforts, new program analyses need to be developed that are specifically tailored to the unique task of Web site reverse engineering. To illustrate the design space for program analyses, we introduce a classification based on dichotomies and discuss each of them in the light of Web site reverse engineering. The main contribution of the paper is a better understanding of the program analyses features for Web site reverse engineering.
25 years of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research (CIDRR): A modern bibliometric and Altmetrics network analysis

Hamoun Sabri,Paolo Nava,Shayan Barootchi,Lorenzo Tavelli,Alberto Monje,José Nart,Hom‐Lay Wang,Muhammad H. A. Saleh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13335

2024-05-08

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research

Abstract:Introduction Since its establishment in 1999, the journal of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research (CIDRR) has consistently disseminated notable clinical and translational research within the domain of oral implantology. As the journal approaches its milestone 25th anniversary, this study endeavors to systematically delineate the publication trends, level of evidence, and bibliometric indices characterizing the initial quarter‐century of CIDRR's scholarly activity. Notably, the investigation adopts a contemporary methodology by incorporating Altmetric analysis, thereby enriching the evaluation with an assessment of the broader societal and online impact of the published research. Methods A comprehensive search was performed in SCOPUS and PubMed to access the bibliographic data of all articles published in the journal from 1999 to 2024. Additionally, Altmetric database was used to obtain social media attention scores (AAS). Journal's overall performance via impact factor and quartile range was assessed. Most cited papers were identified and the most prolific authors, institutions and countries and the collaboration networks among those were assessed. The level of evidence of all articles was determined based on Oxford level of evidence scale. All articles were categorized based on their major topic in the field of implant dentistry. Results Throughout its first 25 years of activity, CIDRR published 1912 articles with an annual growth rate of 2.67% and consistently being ranked at Q1 quartile in "Dentistry (miscellaneous)" and "Oral Surgery" journal categories. When clinical studies are considered, level I and II evidence constituted 22.82% and 11.82% of all articles, respectively. Sweden, the USA, and Italy as well as Göteborgs Universitet, Sahlgrenska Akademin. and Malmö Högskola were the most prolific countries and institutions respectively. "Implant system/design/characteristics," "Bone Augmentation," and "Implant Prosthesis" were the top most investigated topics. Conclusions The examination of the journal's initial 25 years highlighted that CIDRR has surpassed similar dental research journals in publishing a greater number of high‐level evidence articles. It also showcased diverse country‐ and author‐collaboration networks. However, the journal's social media presence is still evolving. This article, presenting a comprehensive overview of the journal's scientometric and bibliographic activities, serves as a valuable reference for researchers, clinicians, and stakeholders, offering insights into both traditional and contemporary perspectives.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Global mapping of randomised trials related articles published in high-impact-factor medical journals: a cross-sectional analysis

Ferrán Catalá-López,Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent,Lisa Caulley,Brian Hutton,Rafael Tabarés-Seisdedos,David Moher,Adolfo Alonso-Arroyo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3944-9

IF: 2.728

2020-01-07

Trials

Abstract:Abstract Background Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide the most reliable information to inform clinical practice and patient care. We aimed to map global clinical research publication activity through RCT-related articles in high-impact-factor medical journals over the past five decades. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of articles published in the highest ranked medical journals with an impact factor > 10 (according to Journal Citation Reports published in 2017). We searched PubMed/MEDLINE (from inception to December 31, 2017) for all RCT-related articles (e.g. primary RCTs, secondary analyses and methodology papers) published in high-impact-factor medical journals. For each included article, raw metadata were abstracted from the Web of Science. A process of standardization was conducted to unify the different terms and grammatical variants and to remove typographical, transcription and/or indexing errors. Descriptive analyses were conducted (including the number of articles, citations, most prolific authors, countries, journals, funding sources and keywords). Network analyses of collaborations between countries and co-words are presented. Results We included 39,305 articles (for the period 1965–2017) published in forty journals. The Lancet ( n = 3593; 9.1%), the Journal of Clinical Oncology ( n = 3343; 8.5%) and The New England Journal of Medicine ( n = 3275 articles; 8.3%) published the largest number of RCTs. A total of 154 countries were involved in the production of articles. The global productivity ranking was led by the United States ( n = 18,393 articles), followed by the United Kingdom ( n = 8028 articles), Canada ( n = 4548 articles) and Germany ( n = 4415 articles). Seventeen authors who had published 100 or more articles were identified; the most prolific authors were affiliated with Duke University (United States), Harvard University (United States) and McMaster University (Canada). The main funding institutions were the National Institutes of Health (United States), Hoffmann-La Roche (Switzerland), Pfizer (United States), Merck Sharp & Dohme (United States) and Novartis (Switzerland). The 100 most cited RCTs were published in nine journals, led by The New England Journal of Medicine ( n = 78 articles), The Lancet ( n = 9 articles) and JAMA ( n = 7 articles). These landmark contributions focused on novel methodological approaches (e.g. the “Bland-Altman method”) and trials on the management of chronic conditions (e.g. diabetes control, hormone replacement therapy in postmenopausal women, multiple therapies for diverse cancers, cardiovascular therapies such as lipid-lowering statins, antihypertensive medications, and antiplatelet and antithrombotic therapy). Conclusions Our analysis identified authors, countries, funding institutions, landmark contributions and high-impact-factor medical journals publishing RCTs. Over the last 50 years, publication production in leading medical journals has increased, with Western countries leading in research but with low- and middle-income countries showing very limited representation.

medicine, research & experimental
Publication trends of the Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry: A bibliometric analysis

Aurélio de Oliveira Rocha,Lucas Menezes dos Anjos,Thaine Oliveira Lima,Natalia de Oliveira Miranda,Ricardo de Souza Magini,Rodrigo Ricci Vivan,Bruno Henriques,Mariane Cardoso

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13224

2024-03-20

Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry

Abstract:Objective The Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry (JERD) stands out as one of the most prominent international journals publishing research in esthetic dentistry. This study analyzed articles published by JERD since the year 2000 through bibliometric analysis. Methodology The search was conducted in January 2024 using Scopus. The following data were extracted from the articles: citation count, year, language, access type, funding agency, study design, theme (general and specific), country, institution, authors, and keywords. The VOSviewer software was used to generate collaborative network maps among the data. Dimensions were consulted to measure altmetric data. Google Trends was used to investigate the global popularity of JERD research. Results A total of 1394 articles were included in this analysis. Citation count ranged from 0 to 625 (average: 16.9). Articles were published between 2000 and 2023. Laboratory studies were more prevalent (n = 850), with the most investigated general theme being restorative procedures (n = 882), and the highlighted specific theme being the use of composite resin (n = 327). The United States had the highest number of articles (n = 640), with the diverse distribution among other countries. The most common keyword was "cad/cam" (n = 63). VOSviewer demonstrated high collaboration among countries. Intense mentions were identified primarily on Facebook. According to Google Trends, Egypt was the country that searched for JERD the most. Conclusions JERD exhibited significant growth in the number of published articles and their diversity by topics, types, origin (country), number of citations, and impact factor. Clinical Significance The JERD is a journal that publishes studies influencing clinical practice. Identifying the key characteristics of this journal is essential for charting future paths.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Comparative Clinical Behavior of Zirconia versus Titanium Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Danilo Morena,Bruno Leitão-Almeida,Miguel Pereira,Rodrigo Resende,Juliana Campos Hasse Fernandes,Gustavo Vicentis Oliveira Fernandes,Tiago Borges

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13154488

2024-07-31

Abstract:Objective: The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess whether there were clinically relevant differences in the treatment of edentulous areas comparing zirconia (Zr) and titanium (Ti) dental implants. The null hypothesis is that no differences can be observed in terms of the clinical parameters; the positive hypothesis I is that Zr implants have generally better results compared to Ti implants; and the positive hypothesis II is that Ti implants have a generally superior result than Zr implants. Methods: This review work was registered on the PROSPERO platform, and its development was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. The electronic search process was conducted on three databases (PubMed/Scopus/Web of Science), including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the past 10 years (up to April 2024). Identified articles were analyzed and included/excluded based on pre-defined selection and exclusion criteria. The quality assessment and risk of bias were evaluated using a Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool specifically designed for randomized trials (RoB2). A meta-analysis was conducted to correlate different treatment options based on the described outcomes; a random-effects model was used in the analysis of the variables. The analysis of heterogeneity was conducted by means of Cochran's Q-test and Higgins' I2 statistic. Results: Six RCTs were enrolled; 152 patients (90 males and 62 females) and 448 implants (267 Zr and 181 Ti) were included. Dental implant placement involved both the maxillary and mandibular arches. The implant sites showed heterogeneity in receiving Zr and Ti dental implants; in particular, 22 dental implants were placed in the mid-palatal region and 426 dental implants in the alveolar region (255 were in Zr and 171 in Ti). Regarding the success rate, it was better for Zr but with no statistical difference (p > 0.05); bleeding on probing had slight differences between Ti with 0.34% ± 0.42 and Zr with 0.26% ± 0.36 (p > 0.05); plaque score showed 0.46 ± 0.47 for Ti compared to 0.44 ± 0.49 for Zr (p > 0.05); no statistically significant difference was observed for pink esthetic score (PES). Statistically significant results were found for survival rate, which favored Ti implants (77.6%) compared to Zr (70.3%) (p < 0.05), and for marginal bone loss, which showed less loss in Ti implants (0.18 mm ± 0.47) compared to 0.42 mm ± 0.40 in Zr at 12 months (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The present systematic review and meta-analysis identified the positive hypothesis I and rejected the null and positive hypothesis II; it was possible to conclude that Ti dental implants have a better survival rate and less marginal bone loss than Zr dental implants after 1-year follow-up.
Endosseous Dental Implant Materials and Clinical Outcomes of Different Alloys: A Systematic Review

Luca Fiorillo,Marco Cicciù,Tolga Fikret Tozum,Matteo Saccucci,Cristiano Orlando,Giovanni Luca Romano,Cesare D'Amico,Gabriele Cervino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15051979

2022-03-07

Abstract:In recent years, implantology has made significant progress, as it has now become a safe and predictable practice. The development of new geometries, primary and secondary, of new surfaces and alloys, has made this possible. The purpose of this review is to analyze the different alloys present on the market, such as that in zirconia, and evaluate their clinical differences with those most commonly used, such as those in grade IV titanium. The review, conducted on major scientific databases such as Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science and MDPI yielded a startling number of 305 results. After the application of the filters and the evaluation of the results in the review, only 10 Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) were included. Multiple outcomes were considered, such as Marginal Bone Level (MBL), Bleeding on Probing (BoP), Survival Rate, Success Rate and parameters related to aesthetic and prosthetic factors. There are currently no statistically significant differences between the use of zirconia implants and titanium implants, neither for fixed prosthetic restorations nor for overdenture restorations. Only the cases reported complain about the rigidity and, therefore, the possibility of fracture of the zirconium. Certainly the continuous improvement in these materials will ensure that they could be used safely while maintaining their high aesthetic performance.

Research group forswears financial ties to firms whose drugs it tests.

Altmetric and impact analysis of randomized clinical trials in dentistry

Pharmacology of benzamidine-type thrombin inhibitors.

Bibliometric and visualized analysis of randomized controlled trials in orthodontics between 1991 and 2022

Scientific Trends in Clinical Research on Zirconia Dental Implants: A Bibliometric Review

Evidence and risk indicators of non‐random sampling in clinical trials in implant dentistry: A systematic appraisal

Demographic characteristics of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials in orthodontic journals with impact factor

The 50 most cited articles on soft tissue integration of dental implants: A bibliometric analysis

Characteristics and Impact of Randomized Trials on Drugs or Devices in Cardiovascular Medicine

What is the impact of patient attributes, implant characteristics, surgical techniques, and placement location on the success of orthodontic mini-implants in young adults? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Reporting of sample size parameters for randomized controlled trials published in high impact factor endodontic journals in the last decade: A bibliometric analysis

Spin in the Abstracts of Randomized Controlled Trials in Oral Implantology: A Cross‐sectional Analysis

The impact of gender on citation rates: An observational study on the most cited dental articles

Assessing transparency practices in dental randomized controlled trials

A Bibliometric Analysis of the 100 Most-Cited Articles concerning Atraumatic Restorative Treatment

Leveraging program analysis for Web site reverse engineering

25 years of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research (CIDRR): A modern bibliometric and Altmetrics network analysis

Global mapping of randomised trials related articles published in high-impact-factor medical journals: a cross-sectional analysis

Publication trends of the Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry: A bibliometric analysis

Comparative Clinical Behavior of Zirconia versus Titanium Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Endosseous Dental Implant Materials and Clinical Outcomes of Different Alloys: A Systematic Review