ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
A Scientometric Study of Saudi PubMed-Indexed Endodontic Research.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Scientometric studies play a crucial role in quantitatively assessing the impact and quantity of scholarly articles, providing a basis for policy-making and informed decision-making processes. Given the ongoing transformation within the Saudi scientific community across various domains, it is essential to establish a baseline for high-quality endodontic research. A comprehensive search in the PubMed database, using the keywords ["Saudi" OR "Saudi Arabia"] within the time frame of 2014 to 2021. The screening process involved evaluating the title and abstract of each article, with only those classified as endodontic articles included for analysis in this study. The analysis included factors such as the type of paper, the authors, the citations, and the year of publication. Featuring one or more authors affiliated with a Saudi dental institution, 70 papers were specifically categorized as endodontic papers. The most prevalent type of paper was case reports, accounting for 27 articles (28%), followed by literature reviews with 13 articles (18%). The number of authors ranged from one to ten, with a general trend of increasing publication rates over the years. In terms of citations, only four papers received more than 20 citations, while the majority of papers garnered between one and ten citations. Most articles in the field of endodontics exhibited low-level evidence. Therefore, it is recommended that the quality of research output and evidence be enhanced.
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.