Bibliometric and Altmetric Analyses of the 100 Top-Cited Letters in Endodontics

Objective: The purpose of this study was to analyze bibliometric and altmetric features of the 100 top-cited letters in endodontics and the relationships of these features with the number of citations. Material and Methods: Scopus, Web of Science, Altmetric and PlumX databases were reviewed to identify the relevant letters and/or obtain their bibliometric and altmetric measures. Univariate statistical tests were used to analyze the relationships between the number of citations and various continuous (Altmetric Attention Score, captures, usage) and categorical (publication model, journal type, social media, institutional collaboration type) parameters of the letters. Poisson regression in a generalized linear model was used for analysis of the parameters found to be significant in the univariate tests. Results: The top-cited letter received 58 citations. Regenerative endodontics had the most letters of any subspecialty (n = 10). There were 13 different types of letters. Opinion letters received the most citations in total. The most frequent type included the letters commenting on a previous document (n = 31). Articles were the most common type of document commented on, whereas the majority of the comments were negative. The multivariate test revealed that the number of captures (p = 0.001) and the non-dental journal type (p = 0.001) increased the number of citations by 2.533 and 1.008 times, respectively. Conclusion: Endodontic letters published in non-dental journals or captured by readers in bibliographic management programs are more likely to be cited. Letters expressing opinions on any free topic were the most cited letter type.