ReviewOdontology2026
Odontology (2005-2025): historical perspectives and publication trends based on a metric-based analysis.
Review in Odontology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Odontology is a prominent journal in the field of dentistry. This study aimed to analyze articles published in odontology through a bibliometric and altmetric review. A search was conducted in Scopus in August 2025. The following data were extracted: number and density of citations, year of publication, language, access type, document type, study design, research area, financing agency, country, institution, authorship, and keywords. VOSviewer was used to generate collaboration maps, while dimensions provided altmetric data. Google trends was consulted to assess the popularity of search interest related to odontology. Spearman's correlation was applied to evaluate the relationship between citations and publication year. A total of 1257 articles were included. Citation counts ranged from 0 to 432, and publications spanned from 2005 to 2025. Research articles were the most common document type (n = 1110). The majority of studies were laboratory-based (n = 871), most frequently associated with oral diagnosis (n = 263). Japan led in the number of publications (n = 396), and The Nippon Dental University was the most prolific institution (n = 183). Endo T was identified as the most productive author (n = 19). VOSviewer visualizations indicated international and author-level collaborations. A high level of engagement was observed among mendeley readers and X (formerly twitter) users. Odontology has experienced a steady growth in publications over the past two decades. Most studies were laboratory-based, with a strong focus on oral diagnosis. Social interest was particularly evident among users of mendeley and X.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41369713What 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.