IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v128y2023i6d10.1007_s11192-023-04696-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientific production of an oral implantology journal: a 5-year bibliometric study

Author

Listed:
  • Julián Espinosa-Giménez

    (University of Valencia)

  • Vanessa Paredes-Gallardo

    (University of Valencia)

  • María Dolores Gómez-Adrián

    (Universidad Católica de Valencia)

  • Carlos Bellot-Arcís

    (University of Valencia)

  • Verónica García-Sanz

    (University of Valencia)

Abstract

Oral implantology is a science in constant evolution, with a considerable number of articles being published every year in scientific journals. Publications can be analyzed through bibliometric analysis, thus observing the evolution and trends of the articles published in the journal. To evaluate, through bibliometric analysis, the scientific production of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research (CIDRR) and its evolution and trends in the last 5 years (2016–2020).All articles published in CIDRR in the last 5 years were reviewed and classified according to the year of publication, volume, number, the number of authors, demographic data of the first and last author, the geographical scope of the article, the number of affiliations of the authors, research topic, type of study, and study design. The association between these variables and citation counts was also analyzed. 599 articles were analyzed. 77.4% were authored by 4–6 authors, obtaining 78.4% from 1 to 3 different affiliations. Male researchers predominated in both the first and last authorship. China showed the highest number of publications when comparing the origin of the authors’ affiliations individually; however, most researchers (40.9%) were from the European Union (EU)-Western Europe area. The most studied topic was the implant/abutment design/treatment of the surface (19.1%). Clinical research articles accounted for 92.99% of the publications, of which cross-sectional observational studies prevailed (21.7%). The presence of articles from the United States of America-Canada and EU-Western Europe was positively correlated with the impact factor. This study revealed an increasing trend in Asian research production, particularly Chinese, whereas production of European origin showed a decrease. Clinical studies increased their relative weight to the detriment of translational ones. A growing tendency in the relative weights of female authors was appreciated. Journal citations were associated with certain study variables.

Suggested Citation

  • Julián Espinosa-Giménez & Vanessa Paredes-Gallardo & María Dolores Gómez-Adrián & Carlos Bellot-Arcís & Verónica García-Sanz, 2023. "Scientific production of an oral implantology journal: a 5-year bibliometric study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3535-3554, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:6:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04696-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-023-04696-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-023-04696-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-023-04696-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefanie Haustein & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "The Use of Bibliometrics for Assessing Research: Possibilities, Limitations and Adverse Effects," Springer Books, in: Isabell M. Welpe & Jutta Wollersheim & Stefanie Ringelhan & Margit Osterloh (ed.), Incentives and Performance, edition 127, pages 121-139, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pantea Kamrani & Isabelle Dorsch & Wolfgang G. Stock, 2021. "Do researchers know what the h-index is? And how do they estimate its importance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5489-5508, July.
    2. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Grilli, Leonardo, 2021. "The effects of citation-based research evaluation schemes on self-citation behavior," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    3. Amartya Pani & Pulak Mishra, 2022. "Policies and community participation for integrated natural resource management: a review of transdisciplinary perspective," Journal of Social and Economic Development, Springer;Institute for Social and Economic Change, vol. 24(1), pages 211-233, June.
    4. Thomas Eger & Armin Mertens & Marc Scheufen, 2021. "Publication cultures and the citation impact of open access," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 1980-1998, December.
    5. Cruz-Castro, Laura & Sanz-Menendez, Luis, 2021. "What should be rewarded? Gender and evaluation criteria for tenure and promotion," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    6. Robert Tomaszewski, 2023. "Visibility, impact, and applications of bibliometric software tools through citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(7), pages 4007-4028, July.
    7. Cesar H. Limaymanta & Rosalía Quiroz-de-García & Jesús A. Rivas-Villena & Andrea Rojas-Arroyo & Orlando Gregorio-Chaviano, 2022. "Relationship between collaboration and normalized scientific impact in South American public universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6391-6411, November.
    8. Alberto Baccini & Giuseppe De Nicolao & Eugenio Petrovich, 2019. "Citation gaming induced by bibliometric evaluation: A country-level comparative analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Esteban Morales & Erin C McKiernan & Meredith T Niles & Lesley Schimanski & Juan Pablo Alperin, 2021. "How faculty define quality, prestige, and impact of academic journals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-13, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:6:d:10.1007_s11192-023-04696-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.