ArticleBrazilian oral research2025
Resin-based adhesives, composites, and luting agents: Investigation of article citations and altmetrics.
Article in Brazilian oral research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Social interest in publications on bruxism: an altmetric analysis.Brazilian oral research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, citations, altmetric scores, and field-normalized impact of articles investigating resin-based adhesives, luting agents, or restorative composites were investigated. Articles published in 2019 on resin-based dental materials indexed in Scopus were searched and assessed by independent investigators. Data collected in 2023 included several article variables and, as outcomes, citation in Scopus and Google Scholar, Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS), and Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI). Data were analyzed using stepwise backward quasi-Poisson regression models (p < 0.05). A total of 707 articles were included, which evaluated restorative composites (58.3%), adhesives (27.2%), and luting agents (19.5%). The majority of corresponding authors were from Asia/Oceania (42.2%), with publications mainly subscription-based (54%) and lacking international collaboration (68.5%). Only 1.4% reported conflicts of interest, and 47.7% did not disclose sponsorship. Median citations were 7 in Scopus and 13 in Google Scholar, whereas the median FWCI was 1. The majority of articles had an AAS of zero. Multivariate analysis showed study sponsorship type and journal CiteScore influenced citations, while COI and the author's continent impacted AAS and FWCI, respectively. Articles on luting agents were less likely to receive citations. The report of conflict of interest was associated with approximately 18 times higher AAS values. This study emphasizes the significance of the type of resin-based material, journal CiteScore, authors' continent, and type of sponsorship in affecting citations, visibility, and impact of scientific articles. Research on luting agents may need better dissemination strategies for increased visibility. The substantial effect of COI presence underscores the importance of transparency.
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.