Resin-based adhesives, composites, and luting agents: Investigation of article citations and altmetrics.

Abstract

In this study, citations, altmetric scores, and field-normalized impact of articles investigating resin-based adhesives, luting agents, or restorative composites were investigated. Articles published in 2019 on resin-based dental materials indexed in Scopus were searched and assessed by independent investigators. Data collected in 2023 included several article variables and, as outcomes, citation in Scopus and Google Scholar, Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS), and Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI). Data were analyzed using stepwise backward quasi-Poisson regression models (p < 0.05). A total of 707 articles were included, which evaluated restorative composites (58.3%), adhesives (27.2%), and luting agents (19.5%). The majority of corresponding authors were from Asia/Oceania (42.2%), with publications mainly subscription-based (54%) and lacking international collaboration (68.5%). Only 1.4% reported conflicts of interest, and 47.7% did not disclose sponsorship. Median citations were 7 in Scopus and 13 in Google Scholar, whereas the median FWCI was 1. The majority of articles had an AAS of zero. Multivariate analysis showed study sponsorship type and journal CiteScore influenced citations, while COI and the author's continent impacted AAS and FWCI, respectively. Articles on luting agents were less likely to receive citations. The report of conflict of interest was associated with approximately 18 times higher AAS values. This study emphasizes the significance of the type of resin-based material, journal CiteScore, authors' continent, and type of sponsorship in affecting citations, visibility, and impact of scientific articles. Research on luting agents may need better dissemination strategies for increased visibility. The substantial effect of COI presence underscores the importance of transparency.