Page 7
The visualization algorithm used wasthe Kamada-Kawai, which calculates the total balance of the graph, as the square summation of the differences Materials Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology Pediatric Dentistry Dental Public Health Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clin Oral Invest between the ideal distance and the actual distance for all vertices. With this methodology, therefore, it can be deter-mined which of the specialties are most related, how this relationship develops over time, and what the general con-figuration of Dentistry is in each of the periods according to the position that the specialties occupy.ResultsThe databases generated contained 55,056 citable documents, 49,369 being original articles, 2,076 review articles,3,138 letters, and 473 notes. Among these, 88.44 %, (692documents) were published in DOSM journals and the rest,11.56 % (6,364 documents), in other JCR categories (Non-DOSM) indicators).The output increased more in Non-DOSM (5.7-fold) than inDOMS (1.56-fold) between the first and last period studied.The cited average (CAVG) in DOSM was consistently lower than in Non-DOSM categories for the three periods. Regarding the number of authors, the mode was invariably greaterin Non-DOSM than in DOSM. Figure 1b shows the 20 top-ranking countries in production (%DOC) and shows the output in absolute values. The USA, UK, and Japan headed output for the three periods studied.The most productive Non-DOSM categories and their output and impact indicators are listed for the three 3-year periods. The JCR categories Surgery and Biochemistry & Molecular Biology remained among the top 10 in the three periods. Pharmacology & Pharmacy, Radiology &Nuclear Medicine, and Otorhinolaryngology disappeared from the top during the second and third periods. Mean-while, Biomedical Engineering & Materials Sciences and Biomaterials, absent from the top ten in the first period, ledin the second and third period in output and quality.