Cited by 5scientometrics and bibliometrics researchPsychology Research and BibliometricsDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education Studies

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

Open access
Senthilvadevel, Nigashiny, Ky, Jimmy, Ng, Matthew, Zhao, Tong, Aria, Massimo, D'Aniello, Luca, Lim, Mathew A. W., Canfora, Federica +5 more·2024·Clinical and Experimental Dental Research

Abstract

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.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cre2.896

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • India accounted for less than 5% of global dental publications in 2022, with a substantial proportion published in non-indexed or low-impact journals.

    “A bibliometric analysis from the Scopus database indicates that India accounted for less than 5% of global Dental publications in 2022, with a substantial proportion published in non indexed or low-impact journals (5).”

    From Research Publication Challenges Faced by Dentists in India: A Narrative Review of Multilevel Barriers (2026) · cites this paper as [5]

    Table 2 in Results, ‘Countries, institutions, and departmental productivity’ (page unavailable), reports India at 620 articles (4.3%), but this is for special needs dentistry from 1985–2021, not all dental publications in 2022. The Discussion says the search used Web of Science, not Scopus, and did not assess the quality of individual studies; the paper does not substantiate the claim about a substantial proportion appearing in non-indexed or low-impact journals. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) models encourage the full involvement of the community in every aspect of the research process, helping to ensure more meaningful real-world applications of academic work.

    “Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) models encourage the full involvement of the community in every aspect of the research process, helping to ensure more meaningful real-world applications of academic work (5).”

    From Research Publication Challenges Faced by Dentists in India: A Narrative Review of Multilevel Barriers (2026) · cites this paper as [5]

    The Introduction describes a bibliometric analysis of special needs dentistry, and the Discussion addresses gaps between research and clinical practice. Neither section discusses Community-based Participatory Research or community involvement throughout the research process. Searches for CBPR and community participation found no passage addressing the claim; page numbers were unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Such reforms have been successfully implemented by some Institutions, resulting in increased research output.

    “Such reforms have been successfully implemented by some Institutions, resulting in increased research output (5).”

    From Research Publication Challenges Faced by Dentists in India: A Narrative Review of Multilevel Barriers (2026) · cites this paper as [5]

    The Results section on countries, institutions, and departmental productivity reports publication counts, while the Discussion mentions advocacy for changes to education, policies, and research. Neither passage says that institutions implemented reforms or that such reforms caused an increase in research output (searched: reforms, institutional reforms, increased research output). No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 25 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Senthilvadevel, N., Ky, J., Ng, M., Zhao, T., Aria, M., D'Aniello, L., Lim, M. A. W., Canfora, F., Fortuna, G., McCullough, M., Yap, T., Paolini, R., & Celentano, A.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • University of Naples Federico II (IT)
  • Department of Social Sciences University of Naples Federico II Naples Italy
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
Celentano, Antonio
Venue
Clinical and Experimental Dental Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-06
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
e896-e896
ISSN
2057-4347 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4399748581
Cited by
2
References
25
Citations by year
2025: 2
FWCI
0.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical and Experimental Dental Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
University of Melbourne
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Diverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education Studies
Keywords
special care dentistry, research trends, research productivity, intellectual and developmental disabilities, geriatric dentistry, dental caries, oral health epidemiology, research collaboration, interdisciplinary research
MeSH terms
Dental Care for Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Bibliometrics, Dental Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review