Recent trends in dental research in Saudi Arabia: Mapping review (2010-2020).

OBJECTIVES

To map Saudi-affiliated dental research productivity by institution, managing sector, geographical region, collaboration pattern, study design, dental specialty, time course, publication source, authorship, and funding during 2010-2020.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic search strategy was followed to retrieve data from the Web of Science and MEDLINE/PubMed databases. The study included only articles published in English between 2010 and 2020 by authors affiliated with Saudi dental institutions. Data screening and extraction from full-text articles were performed independently by the two authors. The kappa coefficient was >0.8. Descriptive statistics were calculated, including frequency and percentage. The chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables. Statistical significance was set at a p-value of 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 1,899 articles were included. The greatest research activity was in the Riyadh region (47%). The most productive corresponding institution was King Saud University (29%). National collaborations between sectors represented 24% of publications, and multiple collaborations accounted for 33%. Endodontics showed the highest levels of collaboration between sectors (33%). The most frequent study designs were cross-sectional (51%) and laboratory experimental (19%), while case-control, cohort, and qualitative studies were among the least common. The most productive years were 2018 and 2019, and the average annual growth rate of research productivity was 21%. Implant dentistry showed the fastest growth rate. Total publications and local collaborations increased remarkably during the second half of the decade. Restorative dentistry was the most funded specialty (18%). There were statistically significant associations between study design, dental specialty, and funding (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This bibliometric analysis provides insight into the trends of Saudi-affiliated dental research. Based on our findings, more effective local collaboration between authors, institutions, and sectors; better funding planning for high-quality research; and more research conducted in less well-investigated dental specialties are recommended.