Page 5
With the filter of the address,18 documents were recovered, by which 3 records were discarded; two of these corresponded to works related to research in veterinarian odontology while a third, which was genuinely a dentistry article, belonged to a dentistry journal and was thus recovered despite that the address indicated no dental institution. Afterwards, in Non-DOSM databases,duplicated records were eliminated.The resulting database was analysed by six bibliometric indicators, calculated as specified, which quantifies the time course of the output in the area as well of the sub-specialties, the impact of these in the context of Dentistry as opposed to other categories as well as the time course of authorship.
The geographic origin of the documents was analysed bya multiple-count approach; each document was assigned toall countries appearing in the address field. The workload of each researcher being unknown, this was an unbiased way of analysing the efforts of each country [10]. For the bibliometric indicators used. To allocate papers to subject areas, we considered dental specialties recognized by the American Dental Association(ADA). These specialties are Endodontics, Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Oral and Maxillofacial Clin Oral Invest
Pathology, Pediatric Dentistry, Periodontics, Prosthodontics,Dental Public Health, Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. General Dentistry was also included and represents dental fields not included in the above-mentioned specialties, i.e. those basically related to Operative Dentistry. Also, we consider including Dental Materials and Implants because they are interest areas with a well-defined body of evidence based on scientific and clinical knowledge.For the documents of the databases, both DOSM as well as Non-DOSM, to be associated with the dental specialties considered, an allocation strategy of keywords based on the previously selected keywords (229 descriptors) in theMESH was created.