Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The 300 most cited articles published in periodontology

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

It is important to evaluate the characteristics of the most cited articles in any specialty. The number of citations may be a proxy for clinical and research activity. The objectives of the present methodological study were (1) to report the characteristics of the 300 most cited articles in periodontology and (2) to explore the association of these characteristics with the number of citations.

Methods

We searched in the Web of Science database for the 300 most cited articles published in periodontology on June 15, 2015. We described characteristics of the articles such as type of study, type of scientific journal, topic reported, year of publication, affiliation of the first author of the article, and impact factor. Linear regression analysis was used to investigate associations of these variables with the number of citations.

Results

The search retrieved approximately 155,356 publications; out of the studies that met the eligibility criteria, the 300 most cited were included for analysis. Comprising more than 50 % of the included articles, basic biology and the detection of bacteria were the most prevalent topics. Narrative reviews were the most frequent type of article (27 % of the sample). Regression analysis demonstrated that some characteristics, for example “narrative reviews,” are more prone to be cited than others.

Conclusion

We conclude that scientific evolution in periodontology has been based more on narrative reviews than on reproducible systematic reviews.

Clinical relevance

Future research is encouraged to elucidate the extent to which scientific progress is improved through systematic compared with narrative reviews.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Smith GD, Coatesworth B, Ferrie J, Ebrahim S (2014) Impact factors: do potential authors care? Epidemiology 25:307–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Van Noorden R, Maher B, Nuzzo R (2014) The top 100 papers. Nature 514:550–553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Iqbal A, Glenny AM (2002) General dental practitioners’ knowledge of and attitudes towards evidence based practice. Br Dent J 193:587–591

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pommer B, Becker K, Arnhart C, Fabian F, Rathe F, Stigler RG (2016) How meta-analytic evidence impacts clinical decision making in oral implantology: a Delphi opinion poll. Clin Oral Implants Res 27:282–287

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Nieri M, Saletta D, Guidi L, Buti J, Franceschi D, Mauro S et al (2007) Citation classics in periodontology: a controlled study. J Clin Periodontol 34:349–358

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Corbella S, Francetti L, Taschieri S, Weinstein R, Del Fabbro M (2016) Analysis of the 100 most-cited articles in periodontology. J Investig Clin Dent. doi:10.1111/jicd.12222

    Google Scholar 

  7. Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G (2008) Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J 22:338–342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Faggion CM Jr (2015) Animal research as a basis for clinical trials. Eur J Oral Sci 123:61–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mann CJ (2003) Observational research methods. Research design II: cohort, cross sectional, and case-control studies. Emerg Med J 20:54–60

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Markovitz AR, Goldstick JE, Levy K, Cevallos W, Mukherjee B, Trostle JA, Eisenberg JN (2012) Where science meets policy: comparing longitudinal and cross-sectional designs to address diarrhoeal disease burden in the developing world. Int J Epidemiol 41:504–513

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Listl S, Jürges H, Watt RG (2016 Oct) Causal inference from observational data. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 44(5):409–415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Casadevall A, Fang FC (2010) Reproducible science. Infect Immun 78:4972–4975

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB (1997) Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med 126:376–380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bakkalbasi N, Bauer K, Glover J, Wang L (2006) Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Biomed Digit Libr 3:7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Kulkarni AV, Aziz B, Shams I, Busse JW (2009) Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. JAMA 302:1092–1096

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Feijoo JF, Limeres J, Fernández-Varela M, Ramos I, Diz P (2014) The 100 most cited articles in dentistry. Clin Oral Investig 18:699–706

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fardi A, Kodonas K, Gogos C, Economides N (2011) Top-cited articles in endodontic journals. J Endod 37:1183–1190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Christou P, Antonarakis GS (2015) The 100 most-cited human cleft lip and palate-related articles published in dentistry, oral surgery, and medicine journals. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 52:437–446

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jafarzadeh H, Sarraf Shirazi A, Andersson L (2015) The most-cited articles in dental, oral, and maxillofacial traumatology during 64 years. Dent Traumatol 31:350–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kornman KS, Robertson PB, Williams RC (2014) Commentary: knowledge that shaped the field of periodontology: the American Academy of Periodontology Centennial Commentaries. J Periodontol 85:1–2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC (2011). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins, JPT, Green, S (editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, Available from http://www.cochrane-handbook.org/.

  22. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C et al (2007) Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 7:10

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Whiting P, Savović J, Higgins JP, Caldwell DM, Reeves BC, Shea B et al (2016) ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol 69:225–234

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Periodontology and Operative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Münster, Münster, Waldeyerstraße 30, 48149, Münster, Germany

    Clovis Mariano Faggion Jr

  2. Department of Clinical Stomatology, Section of Periodontology and Implants, Cayetano Heredia Peruvian University, Lima, Peru

    Lilian Málaga & Marco Antonio Alarcón

  3. Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA

    Alberto Monje

  4. Department of Conservative Dentistry, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany

    Anna-Lena Trescher & Stefan Listl

  5. Department of Quality and Safety of Oral Health Care, Radboud University, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Stefan Listl

Authors
  1. Clovis Mariano Faggion Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lilian Málaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alberto Monje
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anna-Lena Trescher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stefan Listl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Marco Antonio Alarcón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clovis Mariano Faggion Jr.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Author Clovis Mariano Faggion Jr. declares that he has no conflict of interest. Author Lilian Malaga declares that she has no conflict of interest. Author Alberto Monje declares that he has no conflict of interest. Author Anna-Lena Trescher declares that she has no conflict of interest. Author Stefan Listl declares that he has no conflict of interest. Author Marco Alarcon declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Funding

The work was supported by the Department of Periodontology and Restorative Dentistry at the University of Münster, Münster, Germany.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 343 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Faggion, C.M., Málaga, L., Monje, A. et al. The 300 most cited articles published in periodontology. Clin Oral Invest 21, 2021–2028 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1990-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1990-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation