The 100 Most-cited Articles on Intracanal Medication: A Bibliometric Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: To examine the 100 most cited papers on intracanal medication in endodontics and determine the major research trends, authors, institutions, and study types. Study Design: Bibliometric analysis. Methodology: Systematic literature search was performed in the Web of Science Core Collection to determine the 100 most cited papers on intracanal medication. Citations, publication year, journal, authorship, country, institution, study design, type of medication, and keywords were extracted. VOSviewer software was employed to create bibliometric maps. Analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, Spearman correlation, and Poisson regression (p < 0.05). Results: The number of citations among the top 100 articles ranged from 1 to 429, with a positive correlation observed across citation counts in different databases. The years 2021 and 2022 had the highest concentration of highly cited articles (n = 13 each). The Journal of Endodontics was the most frequently represented journal (n = 33). Brazil was the leading contributor, with 47 articles, followed by the United States (n = 8), and Canada and Saudi Arabia (n = 5 each). In total, 28 countries were represented. São Paulo State University (UNESP) was the most productive institution (n = 11), and J.F. Siqueira Jr. was the most prolific author (n = 5). In vitro studies were the most common (n = 53). The most frequently used keywords were “endodontics” and “calcium hydroxide” (n = 42). Calcium hydroxide was the most studied medication, whether as control group or in association with other medicaments/vehicle, followed by 2% chlorhexidine gel. Other studies evaluated plant extracts, nanoparticles, bioactive glass, DAP, sodium hypochlorite, and corticosteroid-antibiotic combinations. Poisson regression showed that older articles were cited 5.83% more, while literature reviews were cited 47% less compared to systematic reviews. Conclusion: This is the first bibliometric evaluation of the most-highly-cited articles on intracanal medication that identifies key studies, authors, and institutions, providing significant insight into research trends and gaps in endodontics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.033 | 0.085 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".