Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Dentistry scientometric analysis: a comparative study between Brazil and other most productive countries in the area


This research aims at performing a comparative study between the Brazilian scientific production in Dentistry, from 2000 to 2009 and countries that contribute with at least 2 % of the world’s scientific production indexed in the Scopus database. More specifically, we intend to assess the annual Brazilian scientific production by comparing it to the other countries’, analyze the Brazilian and other countries’ publications in journals with higher impact factors, as well as to highlight the scientific production from these countries and its international visibility, measured by its total and by its average of citations and normalized citation index per year, by comparing the countries, and to compare the index h of such countries. As work procedure, the SCImago Journal and Country Rank was used as source, identifying the group of producing countries in the Dentistry area from 1996 to 2009. From a total of 136 countries, 13 were highlighted as the most productive, each one of them accounting for at least 2 % the worldwide scientific production in the area. The following indicators were raised for each country: number of produced documents, total of citations, self-citations, average of citations per document and index h. We verified that Brazil is the only country in Latin America that is pictured among the most productive ones in the Dentistry area. We observed that Brazil presents a growing visibility and impact in the international scenery, what suggests that its production is constantly consolidating, with Brazilian scientific recognition in the main vehicles of dissemination in the area.

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

Fig. 1


  1. 1.

    CAPES has a fundamental role in the expansion and consolidation of strict sensu post-graduation (master’s and doctorate) throughout all the Brazilian states. Its activities related to high level education can be grouped in the following action lines: assessment of the strict sensu post- graduation; access and dissemination of scientific production; investments on the creation of high quality resources both in the country and abroad; promotion of international scientific cooperation. (CAPES, 2009b).

  2. 2.

    National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) is a sponsoring organ for Brazilian research, linked to the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI). Its competency is to take part in the formulation, execution, follow up, assessment and dissemination of the National Politics of Science and Technology, mainly in the promotion and in the sponsoring of the development and maintenance of the scientific and technologic research, as well as in the creation of qualified human resources for research, in all areas of knowledge (CNPq, 2012).

  3. 3.

    Funding of Studies and Projects (FINEP) is a public company, linked to the ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, whose mission is to promote the social-economic development of Brazil by sponsoring Science, Technology and Innovation within companies, universities, technologic institutes and other institutes, public or private ones, which do research and development activities (FINEP, 2012).

  4. 4.

    In this research, a simplified version of the normalized indicators is used, once it deals with one document type in a single knowledge area. Authors, such as Moed (2009) and Herranz and Ruiz-Castillo (2012) work with more complete formulations in which there are combinations of more than one category, either of theme area or of document type area.

  5. 5.

    The name of the country was inserted in each search in “Country Name”.

  6. 6.

    There are six journals indexed in the SCOPUS. One of them has been indexed since 1990, and another one since 2001 and four of them since 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively.


  1. CAPES-Diretoria de Avaliação (2009a). Documento de área 2009. Accessed 10 April 2011.

  2. CNPq (2012). Competências. Accessed 6 August 2012.

  3. FINEP (2012). Regimento Interno da Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos–FINEP. Accessed 6 August 2012.

  4. Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., & Penan, H. (1995). Cienciometría: la medición de la atividad científica: de la bibliometría a la vigilancia tecnológica. Astúrias: Ediciones Trea.

  5. CAPES (2009b). Missão e objetivos. Accessed 6 August 2012.

  6. Carvalho, A. C. P. (2001). A evolução do ensino odontológico no século XX. In E. Rosenthal (Org.), A odontologia no Brasil no século XX (pp. 49–67). São Paulo: Santos Livraria Editora.

  7. Dias, A. A., Narvai, P. C., & Rego, D. M. (2008). Tendências da produção científica em odontologia no Brasil. Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica, 24, 54–60.

  8. Gil-Montoya, J. A., Navarrete-Cortes, J., Pulgar, R., Santa, S., & Moya Anegon, F. (2006). World dental research production: an ISI database approach (1999–2003). European Journal Oral Sciences, 114, 102–108.

  9. Glänzel, W. (2003). Bibliometrics as a research field: a course on theory and application of bibliometric indicators. Belgium. Accessed 8 November 2010.

  10. Glänzel, W. (2006). On the h-index—a mathematical approach to a new measure of publication activity and citation impact. Scientometrics, 67(2), 315–321.

  11. Herranz, N., & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2012). Sub-field normalization in the multiplicative case: average-based citation indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 6, 543–556.

  12. Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. arXiv: physics/0508025v5 [physics. soc-ph, September 2005]. Disponível em: Accessed 18 April 2009.

  13. Marson, E. (2001). A pesquisa na odontologia no Brasil. In Rosenthal (Org.), A odontologia no Brasil no século XX (pp. 227–234). São Paulo: Santos Livraria Editora.

  14. Moed, H. F. (2009). New developments in the use of citation analysis in research evaluation. Scientometrics, 57, 13–18.

  15. Narin, F., Olivastro, D., & Stevens, K. S. (1994). Bibliometric theory, practice and problem. Evaluation Review, 18, 65–76.

  16. Okubo, Y. (1997). Bibliometric indicators and analysis of research systems: methods and examples. Paris: OECD.

  17. Oliveira, E. F. T., & Grácio, M. C. C. (2009). A produção científica em organização e representação do conhecimento no Brasil: uma análise bibliométrica do GT-2 da Ancib. In X Encontro Nacional de Pesquisa da ANCIB-ENANCIB, João Pessoa, Br, 2009. Anais, João Pessoa: ANCIB.

  18. Rosenthal, E., & Galante, M. A. (2001). A década 1950–1960 sua importância. In Rosenthal (Org.), A odontologia no Brasil no século XX (pp. 235–246). São Paulo: Santos Livraria Editora.

  19. Scarpelli, A. C., Sardenberg, F., Goursand, D., Paiva, S. M., & Pordeus, I. A. (2008). Academic trajectories of dental researchers receiving CNPq’s productivity grants. Brazilian Dental Journal, 19, 252–256.

  20. Scimago Group. (2006). El índice h de Hirsch: aportaciones a un debate. El profesional de la información, 16, 47–49.

  21. Spinak, E. (1998). Indicadores cienciométricos. Ciência da Informação, 27(2), 141–148.

  22. Vieira, E. S., & Gomes, J. A. N. F. (2010). A research impact indicator for institutions. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 581–590.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Maria Cláudia Cabrini Gracio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gracio, M.C.C., de Oliveira, E.F.T., de Araujo Gurgel, J. et al. Dentistry scientometric analysis: a comparative study between Brazil and other most productive countries in the area. Scientometrics 95, 753–769 (2013).

Download citation


  • Information science research
  • Dentistry scientific production
  • Scientometric indicators
  • Index h