ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2022
Scientometric evaluation of endodontic publications by Gulf Cooperation Council region in 21st century.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Review
- Review
- Saudi Arabia's contribution to systematic reviews in dentistry: A bibliometric analysis.The Saudi dental journal · 2024Article
- The orthodontic research trends in Arab League Nations from 2002 to 2021: A bibliometric appraisal.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Gender Variation, subject dispersion and citation impact in dental research: A bibliometric analysis of publications from 2009-2021.The Saudi dental journal · 2024Article
- Bibliometric Analysis of the 100 Most-Cited Articles on Periodontics in the Arab World.Cureus · 2023Review
- Bibliometric Analysis of 100 Most Cited Articles in Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region on Implant Prosthodontics.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryReview
- Publication Trends and Collaborative Patterns in Periodontics Research from Saudi Arabia: A Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryReview
- Research Performance of Saudi Arabia in Endodontics: A Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe appraisal of research productivity is one of the key indicators to evaluate any area of knowledge. The current study aimed to analyze the Scopus-indexed publications on endodontics produced by Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region from 2000 to 2020. METHODOLOGY: The dataset was extracted in May 2021 from Elsevier's Scopus database. Two keywords ("endodontic" and "endodontics") were entered into the basic search with the Boolean operator of OR for a period of 20 years from 2000 to 2020.
resultsOverall, the GCC region contributed 2.82% of the global endodontic research. This share has shown a remarkable increase between 2001 and 2020 from 0.82% to 7.20%. About 60% of documents' volumes were produced during the 2016-2020 period. Around 80% of research was produced by Saudi Arabia, while research articles produced by Kuwait gained the highest citation impact. Out of the ten productive institutions, nine belonged to Saudi Arabia and one was from Kuwait. The majority of research collaboration was conducted with the United States, but research articles produced in collaboration with Japan yielded the highest citation impact.
conclusionThe study highlighted various scientometric attributes of endodontic publications produced by GCC affiliated researchers. The ongoing growth of endodontic literature by GCC countries along with the increasing international collaboration is considered aspiring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.