Search

This article explores the topic of rejected manuscripts in biomedical disciplines. It highlights that manuscripts can be rejected for various reasons and emphasizes the importance of managing rejection as a normal part of the publication process. The study examines the characteristics and rejection rates of studies on the fate of rejected manuscripts in biomedical disciplines. The findings reveal that the USA is the most prevalent affiliation of the first author and radiology is the most researched discipline. The study suggests that there is room for improvement in the reporting and methodology of these studies. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Abstracts of scientific articles should be accurate and detailed in summarizing the information in the full-text because they are the first article section the reader examines. This study assessed the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) abstracts related to implant dentistry and examined associations between reporting quality and study characteristics.Methods: On the 17th of January 2021, we searched the PubMed database for abstracts of RCTs published in high-ranked periodontology and implant dentistry journals from 2016 to 2021. For each abstract, we assessed if the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for abstracts (CONSORT-A) checklist items were reported completely, partially, or not reported. An Overall CONSORT Score (OCS) and relative score (OCS%) were calculated as a proxy to checklist adherance. Linear regression models were fitted to analyze associations between trial characteristics and completeness of reporting.Results: Four-hundred and thirty four of the 678 retrieved abstracts were eligible for inclusion. The mean OCS and OCS% were 6,23 (standard deviation [SD] = 1.56) or 41.5% (SD = 10.4), respectively. Items most frequently reported included the title (n = 434; 100%), intended intervention (n = 425; 98%) and conclusions (n = 430; 99%). Participant allocation, blinding, and trial registration were rarely completely reported with frequencies of 2%, 3% and 4%, respectively. We found that number of authors, continent, type of RCT, number of centers, report of ethical approval, funding, structure and length of the abstract were associated with better abstract reporting.Conclusion: The reporting quality of abstracts in RCTs related to implant dentistry is suboptimal. Journals should start to incorporate and endorse the use of the CONSORT-A guidelines in their instructions to authors to enhance reporting quality. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This systematic review aimed to: (a) generate a descriptive synthesis of preclinical studies assessing the therapeutic potential of regulatory T lymphocytes (Tregs) to arrest periodontitis, (b) evaluate the methodological heterogeneity of the reviewed animal studies and (c) assess the risk of bias (RoB) of the included studies. The electronic search for animal studies included the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and LILACS databases. In addition, a manual search assessed the high‐ranked scientific journals in "periodontics/immunology" and the references listed in the included studies. There were no language, year or publication status restrictions. Two independent reviewers selected and extracted the data, and Cohen's Kappa coefficient was calculated to determine the inter‐examiner agreement. The Systematic Review Center for Laboratory Animal Experimentation's (SYRCLE) tool was used to assess the RoB. A total of 21 of the 425 studies obtained from the database search were included. Treg function was mainly described in Porphyromonas gingivalis‐induced periodontitis (57.1%) in mice (76.2%), where Treg suppression was strongly related to disease progression and Treg induction was strongly related to immuno‐inflammatory response reduction. Of those 21 studies, eight included eight animal experiments using three distinct therapeutic approaches, including: P. gingivalis‐driven immunization (n = 3), retinoic acid inoculation (n = 2) and anti‐inflammatory molecules in polymeric carriers (n = 3), which could modulate the Treg activity through cytokine production (interleukin‐10 and transforming growth factor‐β1), CC‐chemokine‐ and CC‐chemokine receptor‐mediated chemoattraction (CCL22 and CCR4) or Th17‐associated receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand (RANKL) downregulation. However, the studies with animal experiments did not specify the randomization sequences and housing conditions that were used, and therefore, 42.11% of the entries were rated as unclear RoB. Distinct therapeutic strategies involving Tregs could potentially suppress the immuno‐inflammatory response and restore alveolar bone homeostasis during periodontitis. Nevertheless, important methodological variability, poor reporting of treatment effect estimates and unclear RoB suggest using caution when assessing the results of these studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study aimed to assess the prevalence of spin in the titles and abstracts of RCTs in dental caries with statistically nonsignificant primary outcomes and to assess the risk indicators which may be associated with spin. Any original publication reporting a two-arm RCT in dental caries with clearly identified statistically nonsignificant primary outcomes published from January 1, 2015 until October 28, 2022 were included. PubMed was searched electronically to identify the eligible publications. The prevalence of spin in titles and abstracts were assessed and categorized into spin patterns based on a pre-determined classification scheme. The association between spin and the potential risk indicators at study, author, journal, institutional, and national level was assessed. A total of 234 eligible RCT publications were included. The prevalence of spin in the titles and abstracts was 3% (95%CI: 2% to 6%) and 79% (95%CI: 74% to 84%), respectively. The most common spin patterns in the results and conclusion sections, respectively, were results focusing on statistically significant within-group comparisons (23%), and conclusions focusing only on statistically significant results without acknowledgment of statistically nonsignificant results for the primary outcomes (26%). The spin was significantly associated with number of study centers (single-center vs. multicenter) (OR=2.131; 95%CI: 1.092 to 4.158; P=0.03), trial designs (non-parallel designs vs. parallel designs) (OR=0.395; 95%CI: 0.193 to 0.810; P=0.01), and overall H index of institutions for last authors (OR=0.998; 95%CI: 0.996 to 0.999; P<0.01), while it was not significantly associated with the other indicators. In the RCT publications with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes in dental caries, the prevalence of spin may be low in the titles but high in the abstracts. Single-center studies with parallel designs and a lower overall H index of institutions for last authors may be more likely to have spin in the abstracts., (The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Abstracts of scientific articles should be accurate and detailed in summarizing the information in the full-text because they are the first article section the reader examines. This study assessed the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) abstracts related to implant dentistry and examined associations between reporting quality and study characteristics., Methods: On the 17 th of January 2021, we searched the PubMed database for abstracts of RCTs published in high-ranked periodontology and implant dentistry journals from 2016 to 2021. For each abstract, we assessed if the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for abstracts (CONSORT-A) checklist items were reported completely, partially, or not reported. An Overall CONSORT Score (OCS) and relative score (OCS%) were calculated as a proxy to checklist adherance. Linear regression models were fitted to analyze associations between trial characteristics and completeness of reporting., Results: Four-hundred and thirty four of the 678 retrieved abstracts were eligible for inclusion. The mean OCS and OCS% were 6,23 (standard deviation [SD] = 1.56) or 41.5% (SD = 10.4), respectively. Items most frequently reported included the title (n = 434; 100%), intended intervention (n = 425; 98%) and conclusions (n = 430; 99%). Participant allocation, blinding, and trial registration were rarely completely reported with frequencies of 2%, 3% and 4%, respectively. We found that number of authors, continent, type of RCT, number of centers, report of ethical approval, funding, structure and length of the abstract were associated with better abstract reporting., Conclusion: The reporting quality of abstracts in RCTs related to implant dentistry is suboptimal. Journals should start to incorporate and endorse the use of the CONSORT-A guidelines in their instructions to authors to enhance reporting quality. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved., (This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.)

This study investigated the presence of co-authorship from Brazil in articles published in top-tier dental journals and analyzed the influence of international collaboration, article type (original research or review), and funding on citation rates. Articles published between 2015 and 2017 in 38 selected journals from 14 dental subareas were screened in Scopus. Bibliographic information, citation counts, and funding details were recorded for all articles (N=15619). Collaboration with other top-10 publishing countries in dentistry was registered. Annual citations averages (ACA) were calculated. A linear regression model assessed differences in ACA between subareas. Multilevel linear regression models evaluated the influence of article type, funding, and presence of international collaboration in ACA. Brazil was a frequent co-author of articles published in the period (top 3: USA=25.5%; Brazil=13.8%; Germany=9.2%) and the country with most publications in two subareas. The subjects with the biggest share of Brazil are Operative Dentistry/Cariology, Dental Materials, and Endodontics. Brazil was second in total citations, but fifth in citation averages per article. From the total of 2155 articles co-authored by Brazil, 74.8% had no co-authorship from other top-10 publishing countries. USA (17.8%), Italy (4.2%), and UK (3.2%) were the main co-author countries, but the main collaboration country varied between subjects. Implantology and Dental Materials were the subjects with most international co-authorship. Review articles and articles with international collaboration were associated with increased citation rates, whereas the presence of study funding did not influence the citations.

Purpose: During the last two decades, many clinical trials and systematic reviews (SRs) have evaluated the clinical outcomes of immediate implant placement and its effects on soft and hard tissue. Despite the increased popularity and knowledge of immediate implant placement, the evidence about its benefits is still not conclusive. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of published SRs with meta-analyses of immediate implant placement and provide an overview of the key findings., Materials and Methods: Searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were performed to include SRs with meta-analysis of immediate implant placement. Two independent reviewers assessed the methodologic quality of SRs using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Reviews (AMSTAR), the 2003 checklist of Glenny et al, and the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP)., Results: A total of 742 articles were found; 5 were included. All included SRs were published after 2007. Implant survival rate was the most commonly reported outcome. There was insufficient information in the primary studies, and hence in the SRs, about other outcomes and any adverse events. However, the methodologic quality of the SRs was considered to be high., Conclusion: There is a general consensus among the included SRs that it is still premature to draw definite conclusions about the potential benefits of immediate implant placement because of the limited number of well-designed controlled clinical trials. Improvements in future SRs are still required and can be achieved by following established quality criteria, namely researching the unpublished literature and literature not in English and by reporting the quality assessment of primary studies and any sources of bias.

Purpose: Lateral maxillary sinus floor elevation (LMSFE) is a predictable preprosthetic surgical procedure that is used to overcome the limitations of the atrophied alveolar ridge for the placement of oral implants. Techniques using piezoelectric devices (PEDs) and conventional rotary instruments have been described for LMSFE in the literature, with little information regarding their efficiency in terms of membrane perforation, operating time, and implant outcomes. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the intra- and postoperative events associated with the use of PEDs and conventional rotary instruments for LMSFE., Materials and Methods: This systematic review was prepared according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The literature was searched for studies comparing the use of PEDs with conventional rotary instruments for LMSFE. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used to assess the studies selected, and meta-analyses were performed using statistical software., Results: A total of 124 citations were identified. Of these, four studies with 178 LMSFEs in 120 participants were included. The pooled estimates for the risk of sinus membrane perforation did not show any significant difference between the two surgical techniques (risk ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.91; P = .73). Similarly, no significant difference in implant failure was found after 1 year of functional loading. The overall meta-analysis showed a statistically significant difference in the operating time between the two techniques with more time required for PED., Conclusion: The intra- and postoperative events associated with the use of PEDs and conventional rotary instruments for LMSFE are comparable.

Individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic periodontitis have significantly higher levels of interleukin-1 beta compared with systemically healthy individuals with chronic periodontitis. However, there was no significant difference in gingival crevicular levels of other cytokines between individuals with and without T2DM., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)