Keywords :
Hierarchy of evidence, Publication trends, Research, Study design
Citation Information :
Tivanani M D, Mulakala V. Bibliometric Analysis of Systematic Reviews, Meta-analysis, Randomized Controlled Trials in South Asian Orthodontic Journals from 2015 to 2022. World J Dent 2023; 14 (3):281-285.
Objective: This study was conducted to explore authorship characteristics and publication trends of all orthodontic randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews (SRs), and meta-analyses (MAs) published in South Asian Orthodontic Journals (SAOJ) from 2015 to 2022.
Materials and methods: Appropriate search strategies were developed to search for all articles published from January 2015 to July 2022. Asian Pacific Orthodontic Society (APOS) Trends in Orthodontics, Bangladesh Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (BJODO), The Journal of Indian Orthodontic Society (JIOS), Orthodontic Journal of Nepal (OJN), and Pakistan Orthodontic Journal (POJ) are the only five orthodontic journals that meet these requirements. The initial search yielded 39 results, but after the inclusion criteria were applied, the final number of articles was reduced to 31. For each article, various authorship characteristics were recorded. All parameters’ frequency distributions were investigated and tabulated.
Results: More than half of the included publications (51.7%) were SRs, followed by RCTs (45.1%), and Mas (3.2%) published in SAOJ. JIOS appeared to outnumber other journals with the most publications, followed by APOS trends in Orthodontics, OJN, and BJODO. Almost 80.4% of articles were acknowledged by educational institutes. Authorship status of the publications authored by two researchers in JIOS and OJN, three in APOS Trends in Orthodontics, and four or more in JIOS.
Conclusion: From 2015 to 2021, the amount of level-1 evidence orthodontic literature published in SAOJ increased dramatically. This implies that journals are becoming more interested in evidence-based orthodontic studies, as well as a trend for orthodontic authors to conduct and publish their work.
Clinical significance: Academicians, clinicians, and researchers all face challenges in keeping up with the literature as a large number of studies are published in dentistry. RCTs, MAs, and RCTs aid in the summarization of the outcomes of various intervention trials and are thus valuable methods for evidence-based research.
Chatterjee S, Mohanty P, Sahoo N, et al. Bibliometric study of three journals of orthodontics: a comparative analysis of 10 years. J Indian Orthod Soc 2018;52(3):174. DOI: 10.4103/jios.jios_103_17
Ramteke S, Madhan B. Analysis of the type and study design of publications in the journal of Indian orthodontic society and the changes in trends over 2 decades. J Indian Orthod Soc 2021;55(3):291–297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0301574220984588
Eliades T, Athanasiou AE. Impact factor. A review with specific relevance to orthodontic journals. J Orofac Orthop 2001;62(1):74–83. DOI: 10.1007/PL00001920
Garfield E. Fortnightly review: how can impact factors be improved? BMJ Clin Res 1996;313(7054):411–413. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.313.7054.411
Garfield E. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA 2006;295(1):90–93. DOI: 10.1001/jama.295.1.90
Alqaydi AR, Kanavakis G, Athanasiou AE, et al. Authorship characteristics of orthodontic randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses in non- orthodontic journals with impact factor. Eur J Orthod 2018;40(5):480–487. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjx079
Baumgartner S, Pandis N, Eliades T. Exploring the publications in three major orthodontic journals: a comparative analysis of two 5-year periods. Angle Orthod 2014;84(3):397–403. DOI: 10.2319/071113-507.1
Vaid N, Doshi V, Vandekar M. What's “Trend” ing in orthodontic literature? APOS Trends Orthod 2016;6(1):1. DOI: 10.4103/2321-1407.173719
Gyawali R, Pokharel P, Giri J. Demography of publications in South Asian orthodontic journals. J Indian Orthod Soc 2017;51(2):87–91. DOI: 10.4103/jios.jios_178_16
Turpin DL. Improve care with clinical practice guidelines. Am Journal Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136(4):475–476. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.08.009
Luther F. A review of some orthodontic journals. J Orthod 2000;27(1):79–82. DOI: 0.1093/ortho/27.1.79
Kanavakis G, Dombroski MM, Malouf DP, et al. Demographic characteristics of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials in orthodontic journals with impact factor. Eur J Orthod 2016;38(1):57–65. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjv012
Masella RS, Thompson TJ. Dental education and evidence-based educational best practices: bridging the great divide. J Dent Educ 2004;68(12):1266–1271.
Gibson R, Harrison J. What are we reading? An analysis of the orthodontic literature 1999 to 2008. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139(5):e471–e484. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.07.023
Reuters T. A bibliometric analysis of regenerative medicine. Evidence 2011:1–67.
Thanuskodi S. Library herald journal: a bibliometric study. Int Ref Res J 2011;II(4):68–76.
Thanuskodi S. Bibliometric analysis of the journal library philosophy and practice from 2005 to 2009. Libr Philos Pract 2010;1–6.
Hussain A, Fatima N, Kumar D. Bibliometric analysis of the ‘electronic library’ journal (2000-2010). Webology 2011;8(1):1–13.
Lee CJ, Zhang G, Cronin B, et al. Bias in peer review. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 2013;64:2–17. DOI: 10.1002/ASI.22784
Yousefi-Nooraie R, Shakiba B, Mortaz-Hejri S. Country development and manuscript selection bias: a review of published studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:37. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-37
LaFollette MC. Stealing Into Print: Fraud, Plagiarism, and Misconduct in Scientific Publishing. Oakland, California: University of California Press; 1992.
