Factors influencing the impact of randomized clinical trials on dental implants: A bibliometric analysis

Objective To analyze bibliometrics, characteristics, and the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on dental implants published in six high‐impact factor journals and to identify factors contributing to citation number. Materials and Methods A systematic electronic search was conducted...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical oral implants research 2024-01, Vol.35 (1), p.52-62
Main Authors: Mahmoud, Mohamed Ahmed Hassan, Amaral, Guilherme Castro Lima Silva, Souza, Nathalia Vilela, Elagami, Rokaia Ahmed, Sendyk, Daniel Isaac, Pannuti, Claudio Mendes, Mendes, Fausto Medeiros, Raggio, Daniela Prócida, Villar, Cristina C., Romito, Giuseppe A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bias
Bibliometrics
Citation analysis
Clinical trials
Dental Implants
Dental prosthetics
Humans
peri‐implantitis
randomized controlled trials
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Regression analysis
Risk analysis
Statistical analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective To analyze bibliometrics, characteristics, and the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on dental implants published in six high‐impact factor journals and to identify factors contributing to citation number. Materials and Methods A systematic electronic search was conducted in four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) to identify RCTs on dental implants published in six dental journals between 2016 and 2017. Twenty‐five bibliometric variables and paper characteristics were extracted to evaluate their contribution to the citation count. Risk of bias analysis was performed using the RoB2 tool. Negative binomial regression was used to examine the effects of predictor variables on the Citation count. Significance level was set to 5%. Results A total of 150 RCTs included received a cumulative citation count of 3452 until July 2022. In the negative binomial regression analysis, open‐access RCTs exhibited 60% more citations, and RCTs that presented statistical significance received 46% more citations. Conversely, first author affiliations from Africa, Asia and Oceania continents showed 49% fewer citations than publications from Europe. Regarding the risk of bias, 73.3% of the RCTs had some concerns, while 26% were deemed to have a high risk of bias. Only one RCT (0.07%) showed a low risk of bias. Conclusion Within the limitation of the study, factors such as open access, statistically significant results, and country influence the number of citations received by the RCTs on dental implants.
ISSN:0905-7161
1600-0501
DOI:10.1111/clr.14196