Evaluating global research trends in special needs dentistry: A systematic bibliometrix analysis

• Published in: Clinical and experimental dental research Vol. 10; no. 3; pp. e896 - n/a
• Main Authors: Senthilvadevel, Nigashiny, Ky, Jimmy, Ng, Matthew, Zhao, Tong, Aria, Massimo, D'Aniello, Luca, Lim, Mathew A. W., Canfora, Federica, Fortuna, Giulio, McCullough, Michael, Yap, Tami, Paolini, Rita, Celentano, Antonio
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States John Wiley and Sons Inc 01-06-2024; Wiley
• Subjects: bibliometric; Bibliometrics; Dental Care for Disabled - statistics & numerical data; Dental Care for Disabled - trends; Dental Research - statistics & numerical data; Dental Research - trends; Humans; Original; special needs dentistry; systematic; bibliometric; special needs dentistry; systematic
• ISSN: 2057-4347; 2057-4347
• DOI: 10.1002/cre2.896

Objectives
Special needs dentistry (SND) is a vast and fragmented field of study. This comprehensive bibliometric analysis aimed to evaluate the scope of SND, including the existing knowledge base, distribution structure, quantitative relationships, and research trends.
Material and Methods
A systematic search was conducted on March 10, 2022, using the Web of Science Core Collection database, covering the period from 1985 to 2021, focusing on studies reporting on special needs populations in a dentally relevant context. Records were title‐screened and analyzed for key bibliometric indicators.
Results
Among 48,374 articles, 13,869 underwent bibliometric analysis. Peak SND research occurred during 1985–1997. United States led in productivity, trailed by Brazil and Japan. University of Sao Paulo excelled in Brazil, University of Washington and University of North Carolina in the United States. The Journal of Dental Research was the most productive source of research and also had the highest number of citations, followed by Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology. Keyword analysis revealed that “elderly”, “caries”, and “epidemiology” were the most commonly used author keywords.
Conclusions
This study represents the first bibliometric analysis of SND literature. It emphasizes the need for increased collaboration between institutions and authors. Furthermore, it suggests focusing on research input from non‐dental disciplines and populations with rarer intellectual or developmental conditions.