Objective: This study aimed to assess the impact of oral medicine (OM) practitioners on the literature regarding oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs), focusing on oral leukoplakia. Study design: Using a bibliometric approach on the Scopus database until September 1, 2022, the top 100 cited articles were analyzed for article type, subtopic, specialty contributions, author metrics, and keywords. The Bibliometrix package for R and VOSviewer were used to evaluate interactions and generate science maps. Results: OM practitioners, comprising 39% of contributors, played a significant role in studies related to nomenclature and screening of OPMDs. Notably, 4 OM specialists ranked among the most prolific authors, demonstrating denser collaboration with OM co-authors compared to other cancer specialists. However, there was a scarcity of OPMD management studies authored by OM practitioners. Conclusions: Despite the paucity of OM practitioners, the findings underscored the substantial contribution of OM practitioners in developing OPMD nomenclature and classification, emphasizing the need for increased collaboration with cancer specialists to conduct comprehensive clinical trials for OPMD management. The study highlights the importance of standardized criteria in OPMDs research for better data comparison and encourages further efforts from the OM scientific community.

World Workshop on Oral Medicine VIII-barriers to research in oral medicine: lessons learned from a bibliometric analysis of the oral potentially malignant disorders literature

Ottaviani, G.;
2024-01-01

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to assess the impact of oral medicine (OM) practitioners on the literature regarding oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs), focusing on oral leukoplakia. Study design: Using a bibliometric approach on the Scopus database until September 1, 2022, the top 100 cited articles were analyzed for article type, subtopic, specialty contributions, author metrics, and keywords. The Bibliometrix package for R and VOSviewer were used to evaluate interactions and generate science maps. Results: OM practitioners, comprising 39% of contributors, played a significant role in studies related to nomenclature and screening of OPMDs. Notably, 4 OM specialists ranked among the most prolific authors, demonstrating denser collaboration with OM co-authors compared to other cancer specialists. However, there was a scarcity of OPMD management studies authored by OM practitioners. Conclusions: Despite the paucity of OM practitioners, the findings underscored the substantial contribution of OM practitioners in developing OPMD nomenclature and classification, emphasizing the need for increased collaboration with cancer specialists to conduct comprehensive clinical trials for OPMD management. The study highlights the importance of standardized criteria in OPMDs research for better data comparison and encourages further efforts from the OM scientific community.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S2212440324001342-main.pdf

Accesso chiuso

Tipologia: Documento in Versione Editoriale
Licenza: Copyright Editore
Dimensione 868.15 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
868.15 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11368/3075083
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact