Journal Of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery Research Articles

Top 100 cited systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the major journals of oral and maxillofacial surgery: a bibliometric analysis.

The aim of this bibliometric research was to identify and analyze the top 100 cited systematic reviews in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery in order to guide any professional level with interest in this topic and to map the current trends the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Using the Web of Science database without restrictions on publication year or language, a bibliometric analysis was performed for the five major journals of oral and maxillofacial surgery: International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (IJOMS), Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (JOMS), Journal of Cranio-maxillofacial Surgery (JCMS),British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS), and Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology (Triple-O). The most top-cited systematic review was published in 2015 with a total of 200 citations on survival and success rates of dental implants, consistent with the finding that "pre- and peri-implant surgery and dental implantology," and "craniomaxillofacial deformities and cosmetic surgery" were the most frequently cited topics (22% each). The majority of top cited papers were published in IJOMS (43%), followed by JOMS (34%), Triple-O (8%), JCMS(8%) and BJOMS(7%). The highest number of contributions was from the Netherlands, followed by Italy and USA. The outcome of this article can be used as a source of information and to guide not just researchers but also clinicians and students to which areas are trending in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery, thus also having a large impact on the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. However, this article cannot reflect the quality of the included systematic reviews.

Factors Associated With Low and High Article Citations in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Literature

We assessed the factors in reported oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) studies associated with the number of citations. We identified all primary research studies reported from 1998 to 2008 in the International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery (JOMS), British Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery (BJOMS), and Journal of Craniomaxillofacial Surgery. Of the identified studies, 66 had obtained only 0 to 3 citations in the 10years after publication. We compared these lowest cited reports with the 66 highest cited reports. The characteristics of the lowest and highest cited studies were compared using bivariate analysis. Logistic regression analysis using generalized estimating equations was conducted to examine the association between the selected article-, author-, and journal-level characteristics and high citations. On the initial bivariate analysis, highly cited studies were associated with greater abstract and manuscript word counts (P<.0001), manuscript pages (P<.0001), figures (P=.0482), sample sizes (P=.0149), and references (P<.0001). They were also more likely to have reported a significant result (P=.0202), been published in JOMS (P=.0405), and covered topics such as dentoalveolar/implantology and trauma/reconstruction (P=.0002). Lowly cited articles were more likely to have been published in BJOMS (P=.0405) and addressed topics unrelated to core OMS procedures (P=.0002). The H-indexes of the first and corresponding authors were greater in the high-citation group (P<.0001). After multivariate analysis, a greater number of manuscript pages (P=.0015) and classification as dentoalveolar/implantology (P=.0017) or trauma/reconstruction (P=.0368) had greater odds of high citations. In addition, a higher H-index for the first author made it more likely to be in the high-citation group (P=.0397). Relatively few studies in the OMS literature failed to produce citations in the 10years after publication, indicating that most studies accepted for publication provide meaningful contributions. Significant differences were found between the highest and lowest cited publications, suggesting that study design and article structure might influence the articles' audience and effect.

Open Versus Closed Treatment Of Subcondyle Mandible Fracture: An Evidence-Based Case Report

&#x0D; &#x0D; &#x0D; &#x0D; Background : Mandibular subcondyle fractures are accounted for 25%-35% of all mandible fractures. Closed treatment has been the preferred treatment for several years because it’s relatively easier and non invasive but the complications that may arise are varied. Open reduction was one of the options that is considered to reduce complications. This study examines whether open reduction was a better choice than closed reduction in the management of mandible subcondyle fracture with parameter outcomes are complications, facial nerve injury, pain, and mouth occlusion.&#x0D; Method: A literature study was conducted from two databases: PubMed and Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery (JOMS) with predefined keywords and references from 23-28 January 2018. The search was conducted with mandible subcondyle fracture, open reduction, and closed reduction. The search has been limited only for the last 5 years and limited to meta-analysis and systematic review. From the search, there were three articles used based on inclusion criteria in this case review.&#x0D; Result: The reviewed articles showed that open reduction provides better results than closed reduction, although open reduction results in complications of facial injuries and facial nerve weakness, but the complications were transient and tolerable.Conclusion: Based on existing clinical evidence, open reduction was the preferred management rather than closed. reduction due to better outcome and fewer complication.&#x0D; &#x0D; &#x0D; &#x0D;

Dual-degree oral and maxillofacial surgery: evidence-based view of Chilean candidates

Dual-degree oral and maxillofacial surgery: evidence-based view of Chilean candidates

Publication bias in oral and maxillofacial surgery journals: An observation on published controlled trials

Publication bias (PB) diminishes the full distribution of research, distorts and discredits the scientific record, and thus compromises evidence-based practice. The objective of this study was to analyse published controlled trials with regard to PB in leading oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) journals. All controlled trials published in the International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, and British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in 2008 were analysed for a primary outcome, country of authors, sample size, gender of the first author, funding source and location of the study. Of 952 published articles, 53 controlled trials (5.7%) were identified. The OMS journals preferentially published controlled trials with a positive outcome (77.4%) and from high-income countries (73.6%). Single-centred trials (86.8%) with low sample size (n<100; 69.8%) were published more frequently. The majority of the first authors were male (75.5%). Funding source disclosure was missing in most studies (73.6%) [corrected]. Our results suggest the possible existence of PB in the OMS literature. Hence, it should be borne in mind that the published articles may not be representative of all scientific works, especially when systematic reviews and meta-analyses are conducted or read. In the meantime, journals should establish measures to eliminate PB to uphold scientific integrity. However, this study was an observation based on the published articles. An analysis of all submitted manuscripts would provide more accurate estimates of PB. Ethical considerations on PB are also discussed.

Reporting of ethical protection in recent oral and maxillofacial surgery research involving human subjects

This retrospective observational study investigated the frequency of reporting ethical approval and informed consent in recently published oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) research involving human subjects. All research involving human subjects published in the International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, and Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery during January to June 2005-2007 were analysed for disclosure of ethical approval by a local ethical committee and obtaining informed consent from the subjects. 534 articles were identified; ethical approval was documented in 118 (22%) and individual patient consent in 135 (25%). 355 reports (67%) did not include a statement on ethical approval or informed consent and only 74 reports (14%) disclosed statements of both. Ethical documentation in retrospective and observational studies was scant; 12% of randomised controlled trials and 38% of non-random trials did not report both of ethical protections. Most recent OMS publications involving humans failed to mention ethical review or subjects' consent. Authors must adhere to the international research ethics guidelines and journal instructions, while editors should play a gatekeeper role to protect research participants, uphold scientific integrity and maintain public trust in the experimental process and OMS profession.

Erratum to: "Standards for digital photography in cranio-maxillo-facial surgery - Part II: Additional picture sets and avoiding common mistakes" [Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery (2006) 34, 366-377

Erratum to: "Standards for digital photography in cranio-maxillo-facial surgery - Part II: Additional picture sets and avoiding common mistakes" [Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery (2006) 34, 366-377

Visual cues to female physical attractiveness.

Evolutionary psychology suggests that a woman's sexual attractiveness is based on cues of health and reproductive potential. In recent years, research has focused on the ratio of the width of the waist to the width of the hips (the waist-to-hip ratio (WHR). A low WHR (i.e. a curvaceous body) is believed to correspond to the optimal fat distribution for high fertility, and so this shape should be highly attractive. In this paper we present evidence that weight scaled for height (the body mass index (BMI)) is the primary determinant of sexual attractiveness rather than WHR. BMI is also strongly linked to health and reproductive potential. Furthermore, we show how covariation of apparent BMI and WHR in previous studies led to the overestimation of the importance of WHR in the perception of female attractiveness. Finally, we show how visual cues, such as the perimeter-area ratio (PAR), can provide an accurate and reliable index of an individual's BMI and could be used by an observer to differentiate between potential partners.

Long-term quality of life after ablative intraoral tumour surgery: Schliephake H, Neukam FW, Schmelzeisen R, et al. Journal of Cranio Maxillo-Facial Surgery 23:243, 1995

Long-term quality of life after ablative intraoral tumour surgery: Schliephake H, Neukam FW, Schmelzeisen R, et al. Journal of Cranio Maxillo-Facial Surgery 23:243, 1995