View/Download PDF
Editorial
6 (
1
); 1-4
doi:
10.4103/2321-1407.173719

What’s “Trend”ing in Orthodontic literature?

Private Practice, Only Orthodontics, India
Consultant Orthodontist, Studio Dentaire, Worli, Mumbai, India
Chair, Department of Orthodontics, YMT Dental College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
Address for Correspondence: Prof. Dr. Nikhilesh Vaid, Editor in Chief, APOS Trends in Orthodontics, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. E-mail: orthonik@gmail.com
Licence
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
How to cite this article: Vaid N, Doshi V, Vandekar M. What’s “Trend”ing in Orthodontic literature?. APOS Trends Orthod 2016;6:1-4.

2016 marks the commencement of the 6th volume of “APOS Trends in Orthodontics”. Its been a momentous journey, that we have deeply cherished. This editorial focuses on the bigger picture: The orthodontic publishing arena,as it exists today! What are we reading, and what is getting published in journals worldwide? The number of orthodontic residency programs are increasing globally;and so are the numbers of orthodontic journals. “More”, definitely denotes greater material to peruse; however, does it also imply meaningful and relevant information? This question does open up a Pandora’s box. Analyses of a lot published data points to a large proportion of published research lacking methodological rigor, to be reliable enough for answering clinical questions.[1]

Hence, it is important to understand the intrinsic characteristics of a publication, i.e., topic, origin, basic or applied research, authorship demographics, constituent components of affiliation, and other variables.[2] In light of increasing interest in evidence-based orthodontics, the availability of high-quality evidence is another important factor.[3,4]

There have been a few studies investigating orthodontic journals from 1993 onward that have aimed to analyze the types of articles and their authorship characteristics in three orthodontic journals – American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (AJODO), the Angle Orthodontist (AO), and European Journal of Orthodontics (EJO). However none of these studies have focused on the topics that these articles have addressed.[5,6]

To understand the “trends” that are influencing editorial decisions and the publications that are being accepted currently, we evaluated four orthodontic journals: AJODO, AO, Journal of Clinical Orthodontics (JCO), and the EJO.

To establish a set of comparable data, the method adopted by Kanavakis et al.[4] was followed, and the journals with highest impact factors in Orthodontics, for the last 3 years were selected, i.e., AJODO, EJO, and AO. The fourth journal selected was JCO due to its popularity and high readership numbers. The impact factors for the first three journals are given in Table 1. The impact factor of a journal for a particular year is defined as the number of citations from that journal from the previous 2 years divided by the total number of articles published in those 2 years. Journals are assigned an impact factor in Journal Citation Reports, published by Thompson Reuters.[7]

Table 1: Orthodontic journals with their impact factor from 2012 to 2014 according to Journal Citation Reports, Thomson Reuters
Title 2014 2013 2012
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1.382 1.437 1.458
European Journal of Orthodontics 1.483 1.390 1.078
Angle Orthodontist 1.225 1.277 1.184

The online web edition of the journals was assessed. The examination of the association of the parameters: “type of article,” “main affiliation,” “origin,” and “keywords” across journals was performed. There were in all five reviewers who decided on the specific “topic” category to which the article should belong. Each article was categorized in only 1 topic group and not more. In the case of a difference of opinion on the topic category, the article was to be categorized by a vote amongst the panel of reviewers.

In all, there were 1962 articles evaluated, (combined in all the four journals) with 692 articles published in AJODO, 543 in AO, 256 in JCO, and 435 in EJO, from August 2012 to August 2015.These articles were divided under 45 different topics. The complete data is presented in Tables 2 and 3.

Table 2: Number of articles published between August 2012 and August 2015
Journal AJODO Angle Orthodontist EJO JCO Total
Number of articles between August 2012 and August 2015 692 543 435 256 1962

AJODO – American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics; EJO – European Journal of Orthodontics; JCO – Journal of Clinical Orthodontics

Table 3: Topic wise assessment of articles published between August 2012 and August 2015 in the given journals
Topic AJODO Angle Orthodontist JCO EJO
CBCT 56 32 1 11
Research + training 9 3 0 13
Social media 2 4 2 3
Retention 11 6 5 11
3D diagnosis/digital model 23 13 12 19
TAD’S/plates 52 43 27 26
Bonding 16 24 10 14
Molecular research 26 20 0 16
Root resorption 13 6 2 6
Surgical 35 25 8 10
Statistics/indices 11 3 0 5
Practice management 2 0 13 0
Growth modification 13 23 8 15
Malocclusion 22 22 3 16
Bracket 13 21 8 23
Expansion 21 17 6 8
FEM 11 4 0 8
Force vector 9 6 0 5
Adjunct appliances 10 13 36 8
Anomalies 24 12 5 13
Acceleration 15 3 4 2
Anchorage 14 9 14 4
Mechanics 13 4 9 4
Patient perception 18 18 1 18
Interdisciplinary 15 2 6 1
TMJ/TMD 12 8 3 5
Airway 19 20 0 12
Lasers 4 6 1 1
Bone 21 12 1 8
Esthetics/soft tissue 16 26 3 17
Archwire 7 18 4 11
Impactions 24 8 15 7
CLCP 18 8 0 12
Autotransplant 12 2 3 2
Enamel/pulp 7 4 2 6
Craniofacial growth 15 5 0 16
Lateral cephalograms/ OPG 13 21 0 14
Arch width 13 5 0 6
Rx outcome 17 12 15 22
Invisible 6 8 26 7
Oral hygiene 8 8 1 5
White spot 5 6 0 3
Periods 13 12 2 10
Debilitating disease 5 2 0 1
Mastication/muscles 3 7 0 11

AJODO – American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics; EJO – European Journal of Orthodontics; JCO – Journal of Clinical Orthodontics; TAD – Temporary anchorage devices; CBCT – Cone beam computed tomography; 3D – Three-dimensional; TMD – Temporomandibular disorders; TMJ – Temporomandibular joint; OPG – Orthopantomogram; CLCP – Cleft lip and palate; FEM – Finite element method

We considered each journal individually and the top 10 topics which each of these journals published in the 3 year span, was also evaluated. The complete data for AJODO is presented in Table 4, for AO in Table 5, for EJO in Table 6, and JCO in Table 7. At this point, we would like to clarify that this evaluation is a collation of information, and has not been subjected to statistical evaluation for effects and correlations.

Table 4: Top 10 topic wise assessment of articles published between August 2012 and August 2015 in American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Topic Number of articles
CBCT 56
TAD’S/miniplates 52
Surgical 35
Molecular 26
Impactions 24
Anomalies 24
3D diagnosis 23
Bone 21
Expansion 21
Airway 19

TAD – Temporary anchorage devices; CBCT – Cone beam computed tomography; 3D – Three-dimensional

Table 5: Top 10 topic wise assessment of articles published between August 2012 and August 2015 in Angle Orthodontist
Topic Number of articles
TAD’S/miniplates 43
CBCT 32
Brackets 31
Esthetics 26
Surgical 25
Bonding 24
Growth modification 23
Malocclusion 22
Lateral cephalograms 21
Molecular 20

TAD – Temporary anchorage devices; CBCT – Cone beam computed tomography

Table 6: Top 10 topic wise assessment of articles published between August 2012 and August 2015 in European Journal of Orthodontics
Topic Number of articles
TAD’S/miniplates 26
Brackets 23
Rx outcome 22
3D diagnosis 19
Patient perception 18
Esthetics 17
Malocclusion 16
Craniofacial growth 16
Growth modification 15
Lateral cephalograms 14

TAD – Temporary anchorage devices; CBCT – Cone beam computed tomography; 3D – Three-dimensional

Table 7: Top 10 topic wise assessment of articles published between August 2012 and August 2015 in Journal of Clinical Orthodontics
Topic Number of articles
Adjuncts 36
TAD’S/miniplates 27
Invisible 26
Rx outcome 15
Impactions 15
Anchorage 14
Practice management 13
3D diagnosis 12
Bonding 10
Mechanics 9

TAD – Temporary anchorage devices; CBCT – Cone beam computed tomography; 3D – Three-dimensional

The top 10 article topics combined, after collating all 4 journals were also evaluated. This did throw up some interesting results. We do admit that the focus areas of all the four journals are different; hence collating this information is only for an indication of “trends.”

Articles on TAD’s and miniplates were on the top spot with approximately 150 articles published across the four journals (AJODO published around 52 followed by AO with around 43 articles and EJO and JCO with around 26 articles).

The second most published topic was Cone Beam Computed Tomography. (CBCT), with approximately 100 articles out of which more than half of them were published in the AJODO. The interesting information here was that only one article related to CBCT was published in the JCO.

The next two topics with almost the same number of articles published were “Surgical orthodontics” and “Type of brackets and their treatment effects.” As far as surgical orthodontics is concerned, two -third of the total published articles were in AJODO and AO, with very few in JCO and EJO. For articles published on the “Type of Brackets and their treatment effects”, almost two-third were in EJO and AO with very few in AJODO and JCO.

The complete data for the top topics published are presented in Table 8.

Table 8: Top 10 topic wise assessment of articles published between August 2012 and August 2015 in all four journals combined
Topic Number of articles
TAD’S/miniplates 148
CBCT 100
Surgical 78
Brackets 75
Adjuncts 67
3D diagnosis 67
Rx outcome 66
Bonding 64
Malocclusion 63
Molecular 62

TAD – Temporary anchorage devices; CBCT – Cone beam computed tomography; 3D – Three-dimensional

It is important to understand that topics such as temporary anchorage devices, CBCT, surgical orthodontics were more accepted in AJODO, AO, and EJO. AJODO also gave a lot of importance to topics like molecular research and studies on expansion, airway, and anomalies, which were not a part of top ten topics published in other journals. AO still accepted articles on lateral cephalograms, bonding, bonding materials, and brackets systems. EJO and AO both accepted a lot of articles on esthetic and soft tissue considerations as well as growth modification which was not the case with AJODO. EJO accepted articles on three-dimensional diagnosis and digital models, craniofacial growth, and patient perceptions as well.

JCO accepted more articles on adjuncts, innovative appliances and also on Invisble Orthodontic appliances. We also came across some interesting facts, such as in the last 3 years approximately 25 articles were published on how to conduct orthodontic research and training in AJODO, EJO, and AO. There were publications related to social media in all the four journals in the recent years. JCO alone had 15 articles published on practice management in this time span.

This study could ascertain notable differences between all the four journals with respect to the type and topics they publish. Our collation is aimed to give us a broad insight on what are the current “trends” in orthodontic publication, and these are of course,subject to critical appraisal and detailed analysis. The Editorial Team thanks the readers of APOS Trends for their unstinted support to the journal, over the years. We, reiterate our commitment to be a true reflection of “trends” in Orthodontics across the globe, in the coming years too!

Nikhilesh Vaid1,2, Viraj Doshi3, Meghna Vandekar4

1President and Editor in Chief, Asian Pacific, Orthodontic Society, 2Private Practice, Only Orthodontics,

3Consultant Orthodontist, Studio Dentaire, Worli, Mumbai,

4Chair, Department of Orthodontics, YMT Dental College and

Hospital, Navi Mumbai,

Maharashtra, India

Address for Correspondence: Prof. Dr. Nikhilesh Vaid, Editor in Chief, APOS Trends in Orthodontics, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

E-mail: orthonik@gmail.com

References

  1. . The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ. 1994;308:283-4
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , . Impact factor. A review with specific relevance to orthodontic journals. J Orofac Orthop. 2001;62:74-83
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , , . Transferring evidence from research into practice: 1. The role of clinical care research evidence in clinical decisions. ACP J Club. 1996;125:A14-6
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , . Transferring evidence from research into practice: 3. Developing evidence-based clinical policy. ACP J Club. 1997;126:A14-6
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , , , . Orthodontic journals with impact factors in perspective: Trends in the types of articles and authorship characteristics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130:516-22
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , , . Exploring the publications in three major orthodontic journals: A comparative analysis of two 5-year periods. Angle Orthod. 2014;84:397-403
    [Google Scholar]
  7. The Thomson Reuters Impact Factor. Available from: http://www.wokinfo.com/essays/impact-factor/ (accessed )
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
BibTeX
RIS
Show Sections