British Journal Of Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery Research Articles

A review of technical notes published in BJOMS: a comparison 10 years on.

Technical notes are known to be a popular method of publishing novel surgical techniques, up-to-date technological advances, and tricks of the trade in oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). The British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) has a dedicated section for such papers, and this article explores the publication of technical notes over the last two years. In addition, comparison is made with previous reviews of technical notes in this journal a decade ago, to explore the progression of diversity and evolving topics of interest to the oral and maxillofacial surgery community.

Recent advances in the histopathological assessment of salivary disease.

Salivary gland disease includes a wide range of unique and rare conditions that are treated by ear, nose and throat (ENT), oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMFS) and oral medicine specialists. Histopathological diagnosis is pivotal to making a diagnosis and treatment planning. There is a vast range of conditions and controversies in the histopathological assessment of salivary gland diseases. Most colleagues in oral pathology and oral medicine work closely with the OMFS but might have missed some of the recent articles published by the speciality. We reviewed articles thought to be relevant to oral medicine and pathology specialists published over an 8-year period between 2012 and 2019 in the leading British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS). A total of 44 published articles relating to the histopathology of salivary glands disease were selected. Papers were published on population studies, benign and malignant tumours, sialadenitis, metastasis to the parotid gland and cytology. The publication type and numbers published were as follows: review (n=9), meta-analysis/randomised controlled study (n=1), retrospective study (n=10) and case report/technical notes (n=23). The greatest proportion of publications published in BJOMS were case reports. This emphasises the paucity of consensus and the need for development in this field. Salivary gland disease remains an area with many controversies and would benefit from further research.

How far reaching is our research? An analysis of the journals in which oral and maxillofacial surgery research is cited

In this study we investigate the five most cited articles in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS). Articles cited were usually published in other OMFS journals (40%) or dentistry journals (32%). The mean (SD) SCImago Journal and Country Rank, (SJR) (an interface to access the bibliometric database of journals) for cited papers was 0.64 (SD=0.56). Nearly one third of citations were of research in OMFS and dentistry, suggesting its relevance to the wider academic community.

Full length articles published in BJOMS during 2010–11—an analysis by sub-specialty and study type

Full length articles such as prospective and retrospective studies, case series, laboratory-based research and reviews form the majority of papers published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS). We were interested to evaluate the breakdown of these types of articles both by sub-specialty and the type of study as well as the proportion that are written by UK colleagues compared to overseas authors over a 2year period (2010–11).A total of 191 full length articles across all sub-specialties of our discipline were published, with 107 papers (56%) coming from UK authors. There were proportionately more oncology papers arising from the UK than overseas (60 and 30% of total respectively) while the opposite was found for cleft/deformity studies (10% and 22%). There was only one laboratory-based study published from the UK compared with 27 papers from overseas.The number of quality papers being submitted to the Journal continues to increase, and the type of article being published between UK and overseas probably reflects different practices and case-loads amongst colleagues. The relatively few UK laboratory based studies published in BJOMS compared to overseas authors are most likely due to authors seeking the most prestigious journals possible for their work.

A review of trauma and trauma-related papers published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in 2010–2011

This review summarises all trauma and related papers published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) from January 2010 to December 2011. In total 45 articles were published, of which 42% (19) were full-length articles. These articles primarily focused on the management of mandibular condyle and orbital fractures, with several papers discussing maxillofacial surgery by the British military. There were no articles discussing midfacial fractures or massive facial trauma. The remaining papers included short communications, technical notes, and letters; and provided discussion of interesting cases, new surgical techniques and fracture classifications.The number of trauma papers published in BJOMS appears to be less than other sub-specialties such as head and neck oncology. The number of prospective and randomised studies remains low, highlighting a need to foster further research within maxillofacial trauma.

Mislabeling Controlled Clinical Trials (CCTs) as “Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs)” in Dental Specialty Journals

This study aimed to investigate whether studies published in dental journals with the highest impact factor, representing the 5 major dental specialties and titled as randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are truly RCTs. A second objective was to explore the association of journal type and other publication characteristics on correct classification. The American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (AJODO), the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS), the International Journal of Prosthodontics (IJP), the Journal of Clinical Periodontology (JCP), and the Journal of Endodontics (JOE) were hand searched for clinical trials labeled in the title as randomized from 1979 to July 2011. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and univariable and multivariable examination of statistical associations via ordinal logistic regression modeling (proportional odds model). A total of 222 trials were identified. From the included trials, 88 (39.64%) were considered to be RCTs, 107 (48.20%) were considered to be of unclear status, and 27 (12.16%) were not considered as RCTs. In the multivariable analysis among the included variables, journal type, involvement of statistician, year of publication, multicenter trial, and number of authors were significant predictors of correctly classifying a study as an RCT versus no RCT and of unclear status. This study indicates the need for clear and accurate reporting of clinical trials and the need for educating investigators on RCT methodology.

Oral and maxillofacial surgery: “publication hot spots” in the United Kingdom

We aimed to evaluate the number of articles in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) written by consultants and trainees within deaneries in the UK. We reviewed the authorship of articles published between January 2010 and July 2011, and subdivided them by deanery and first author. In total, 76 full length articles were published (30 written by consultants and 46 by trainees), and half came from the London, Wessex, and Mersey deaneries. Technical notes were mostly written by trainees; 5 of the 22 published came from London. A total of 38 short communications were published; most were from the Wessex (21%), Yorkshire and Humber (29%), and Mersey (13%) deaneries, and in 32% a consultant was first author. A league table of all publications showed that most came from Wessex (n=25), Mersey (n=23), and Yorkshire and Humber (n=23). Most publications by trainees came from Wessex (n=20), followed by Yorkshire (n=18) and London (n=11). The study shows that the amount of published material varies considerably between oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) units in the UK. To realise their ambitions, potential trainees with an interest in research and publications may consequently find the best support in these deaneries.

Short communications published online in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery during 2010–2011

The British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) publishes many types of papers including original articles, review articles, and short communications. Many of the latter are isolated case reports of rare or interesting diseases or of difficult or unexpected complications. While case reports are sometimes considered to be of little educational or clinical value, and as such do little to advance medical knowledge, they do have an important role, and many trainees begin their publishing careers writing such papers. There is increasing pressure for space in paper medical journals and, for this reason, some journals either limit or do not publish short publications in print copy but instead put them online.Using established criteria, we previously evaluated all 142 short communications published in the BJOMS during 2008–2009 and found that 48% of them had little or no educational value. As a result, the editorial board of BJOMS took the decision to publish most short communications online only. We have now analysed 48 short communications that were published online only during 2010–2011. Most (80%) were single case reports that covered virtually the whole remit of the specialty, and over half (56%) were published by authors based in the UK. While many of these papers did not add important new information to existing knowledge, these types of article are clearly of value both for trainees and for experienced surgeons. We think that these should continue to be supported as, in addition to their educational value, they are an excellent way for trainees to start to write.

Review of salivary papers published in the British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery during 2009–2010

The management of salivary gland disease forms an appreciable part of the work undertaken by our specialty. Fast-track and one-stop clinics for head and neck lumps allow for early diagnosis of salivary gland tumours in most units, and for the sharing of cases between our ear, nose and throat (ENT) colleagues. The emphasis on benign salivary gland disease is very much on outcome after operation, and there have been improvements in surgical technique, particularly in relation to minimal dissection of salivary adenomas and sialendoscopy. This article continues a series of reviews, which aim to provide readers with a quick overview and update of recent publications in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery ( BJOMS) within a particular subspecialty.

A synopsis of technical notes published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in 2009/2010

Technical notes form an important part of the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS). Many ideas are novel and some change practice. During 2009–2010, 39 technical notes were published in the journal, and they covered the whole remit of the specialty. In this article we briefly review and summarise these articles, and highlight the salient points.

What are we reading? A study of downloaded and cited articles from the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in 2010

A large number of papers related to oral and maxillofacial surgery are published in many specialist journals. With the ever-increasing use of the internet it is easy to download them as part of a journal subscription on a fee per paper basis, or in some cases for free. Online access to the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) is free to British Association (BAOMS) members with a $30 fee per paper download for non-members. Many colleagues use the online version of the journal, and this provides valuable information about downloading trends. Other data on articles that have been cited in subsequent publications are also readily available, and they form the basis for the calculation of a journal's impact factor. We evaluated the top 50 downloaded papers from the BJOMS website in 2010 to ascertain which articles were being read online. We also obtained data on the number of citations for papers published in 2009–2010 to see whether these papers were similar to the articles being downloaded. In 2010 there were over 360 000 downloaded articles. The most popular papers were leading articles, reviews, and full length articles; only one short communication featured in the top 50 downloads. The papers most cited in subsequent publications were full length articles and leading articles or reviews, which represent 80% of the total citations of the 50 papers. Ten papers were in both the top 50 downloaded and most cited lists. We discuss the implications of this study for the journal and our readers.

A synopsis of head and neck oncology and related papers published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in 2009/10

This review summarises all head and neck oncology and related papers published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) during the period 2009–2010. A similar review, covering the years 2007–2008 was published in the Journal in 2009 and was well received by readers, as evidenced by the high number of downloads from the BJOMS website. In this article, we include all head and neck oncology-related articles published in the print version of the journal during 2009/10 and concentrate on summarising the full length article papers. Compared to the previous 2-year period, there has been a 25% increase in number of articles published in this sub-specialty.

The evidence base for oral and maxillofacial surgery: 10-year analysis of two journals

All articles published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) and the International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (IJOMS) between January 1999 and December 2009 were classified by study design and evaluated to find the evidence base in oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). Those in related specialties, and the impact factor of related dental journals were also compared. From a total of 3294 articles (1715 (52%) BJOMS; and 1579 (48%) IJOMS) most of the studies were observational or descriptive (36% BJOMS; and 31% IJOMS). Review articles constituted 5% in the British Journal and 6% in the International Journal. Analytical (non-controlled) studies made up 6% and 7% of the studies in the British Journal and the International Journal, respectively. There were 28 randomised controlled trials (RCT) (2%) in the British Journal and 40 (3%) in the International Journal. One meta-analysis was recorded in the International Journal, and one closed loop audit was recorded in the British Journal. Forty percent of the papers in both journals were non-clinical, scientific, or animal studies. The number of RCTs published in OMFS is low and is comparable with the related specialties of ear, nose, and throat (ENT) (1%) and plastic surgery (4%). Greater effort is required to carry out quality research if we are to provide the best possible evidence to patients for our interventions.

Review article: oral surgery and TMJ-related papers published in BJOMS in 2008 and 2009

This review summarises the 81 papers relating to oral surgery and to the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) January 2008–December 2009. They include full length articles on distraction osteogenesis, imaging, extraction techniques, implants, and the management of facial pain and disorders of the TMJ including joint replacement. Many short communications were also published, but an editorial decision was taken in August 2009 to publish most of these in future in the online journal only. As BJOMS encompasses the whole remit of the specialty, and other specialist journals on oral surgery are available, it was encouraging to see that authors still choose submit their work to our journal.

Short communication articles published in BJOMS during 2008–2009—an analysis of types of submission and subject material

The British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) accepts many types of papers that include leading articles, reviews, full length articles, and short communications. Many of the latter are isolated case reports of rare or interesting pathology, or personal experience of a difficult or unexpected complication. Case reports are considered to have a relatively low value in the advancement of medical knowledge, and with increasing pressure for space in paper publications, many journals now limit them to online publication only. We evaluated all 142 short communications published in BJOMS during 2008/2009. Most (87%) were single case reports, and they covered virtually the whole remit of the specialty. There were also 14 formal studies that included two laboratory-based research projects; these were excluded from the analysis. We used established criteria to assess the possible educational value of each publication, and found that 61/128 papers (48%), while interesting and informative, probably added little to existing knowledge. The remaining papers described new or unreported cases, rare or unexpected outcomes, and adverse effects or complications of treatment. We discuss the possible implications of this study for readers of BJOMS and for the journal itself.

Technical notes in the BJOMS—a two-year review

Between January 2007 and December 2008, 40 technical notes were published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS). These covered most of the remit of our specialty and ranged from operative surgical techniques to the use of digital photography to orientate surgical specimens. However, there would seem to be very little feedback on the value of these articles in everyday practice.

A synopsis of oncology and oncology-related papers published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2007–2008

This paper provides a summary of the 95 papers related to oncology that were published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) during 2007–2008. They include full length articles on clinical studies, radiology, basic science, and reconstruction in oral, and head and neck cancer. The journal also publishes technical notes and short communications. It encompasses the whole remit of the specialty and it is encouraging that authors choose to submit their work to BJOMS, but to improve the quality and status of the journal, we need to increase the ratio of full length articles to other submissions. Reviews of other subspecialties will be published in due course.

Recent advances in the management of salivary gland disease

The management of salivary gland disease forms a considerable part of the work done by oral and maxillofacial surgeons. Fast track and one-stop head and neck lump clinics allow for early diagnosis of salivary gland tumours in most units, the emphasis being on outcome after operation for benign disease. There have been limited advances in salivary gland surgery in recent years. Most recent publications have compared outcome of new methods of treatment with conventional techniques. This article reviews papers related to diseases of the salivary glands published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) over a two-year period (2007–2008), and includes other relevant articles to bring readers up to date about salivary gland disease.

Technical notes published in BJOMS over a 2-year period—Should we be doing it differently?

Between January 2007 and December 2008, 44 technical notes or related publications (such as letters) were published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS). These covered most of the remit of the specialty and ranged from operative surgical techniques to the use of digital photographs to orientate surgical specimens. However, there would seem to be very little feedback on the value of these articles in everyday practice. We reviewed these technical notes and assessed readability, the value and use of illustrations, the possible expense and/or equipment required in their use, and finally the frequency that the techniques could be used. The anonymised publications were read and scored by a minimum of two dentally qualified senior house officers, two doubly qualified specialist registrars, an SAS grade and two consultants in oral and maxillofacial surgery. The six techniques that gained the highest mean average score are briefly discussed. Although we used a relatively small number of assessors who might not be representative of the whole BJOMS readership, this study would suggest that some sort of change in the way that these technical notes are published should be considered. Options might include inviting a commentary from the reviewers who have tried the technique and also encouraging colleagues to report their experiences of these techniques in the ‘letters to the editor’ section.

O.583 Sinus floor elevation using alloplastic bone graft

This review summarises the 81 papers relating to oral surgery and to the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) published in the British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS) January 2008–December 2009. They include full length articles on distraction osteogenesis, imaging, extraction techniques, implants, and the management of facial pain and disorders of the TMJ including joint replacement. Many short communications were also published, but an editorial decision was taken in August 2009 to publish most of these in future in the online journal only. As BJOMS encompasses the whole remit of the specialty, and other specialist journals on oral surgery are available, it was encouraging to see that authors still choose submit their work to our journal.