Tendências da produção científica em odontologia no Brasil

Abstract

Brazil's scientific output in the field of oral health for the period 2001- 2006 was balanced, with increasing interest in the area of population-based oral health.

Evaluation of scientific production in the field of Dentistry in Public Health from 1999 to 2009

“…The study of Leles et al 17 and Dias et al 13 have shown the predominance of in vitro laboratory researches (60.34%) in the field of health in general, however, the results found differed from this study, since researches with humans were more prevalent. The emphasis on studies in humans may be justified by the high predominance of studies with the thematic domain of Epidemiology 1,18,19 The thematic domain most found in research was Epidemiology, corresponding to over half of the total number (60.79%), as was found in the results of Barreto 1 , Egry et al 18 and Barreto 19 who concluded that in Brazil, scientific production in Epidemiology is higher than it is in other countries in Latin America and is growing constantly.…”

“…The literature has shown low frequency of studies of the systematic review type, simple literature review and meta-analysis 13,17 in detriment to studies of the scientific research type, which may be justified by the profile of publication demanded by the main journals in the area because, although the reviews are important for adequate referral of a problem, researches are published with greater frequency.…”

“…Nevertheless it is fundamental to achieve the knowledge concerning population's health and social determinants of health to organize further actions in Collective Oral Health 13 .…”

“…In Brazil, the social area has been prioritized by the Ministry of Health, and an example of this is the national health system research program: shared health management -PPSUS ("Programa Pesquisa para o SUS: gestão compartilhada em saúde) which was instituted in 2004 to fund research in the social field, with a view to contributing to the reduction in inter-regional inequalities in the area of public health, 28 and the scientific output in oral health within social field has increased significantly 13 and continues in evidence 29,30 .…”

“…Therefore, studies that analyze scientific production are essential to guide researchers in this field by means of evidence. A new classification of the abstracts was made according to the following variables: a) Types of study: Simple or systematic literature reviews, with or without meta-analysis, case reports and scientific research; b) General nature of the research: studies involving human beings; animals, in vitro that sought to simulate real conditions in laboratories, and in situ studies 13 ; and field researches, conducted at the site in which the phenomenon occurred and there were elements to explain it 14 ; c) Geographic origin: North (N), Northeast (NE), South (S), Southeast (SE) and Midwest (MW); in addition to a record of the institution that produced the study, divided into public Universities (PU), private universities (APU) or public health services (PHS); d) Sources of Financing: Survey of studies that received funding from the main agencies in the country: CNPQ -("Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnológico"), FAPESP -("Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo"), CAPES -("Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento do Pessoal de Nível Superior"). Due to the careful selection of the studies inscribed in the Annual SBPqO meeting, only 4 abstracts were excluded during the study, because they did not present the proposed objective in a clear manner (n= 1), did not identify the institution of origin (n=2), and because it was not possible to classify them in the proposed categories (n=1).…”