Search

Objectives: In celebration of the journal's 50th anniversary, the aim of the study was to review the whole collection of Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology (CDOE) publications from 1973 to 2022 and provide a complete overview of the main publication characteristics. Methods: The study used bibliometric techniques such as performance and science mapping analysis of 3428 articles extracted from the Scopus database. The data were analysed using the 'Bibliometrix' package in R. The journal's scientific production was examined, along with the yearly citation count, the distribution of publications based on authors, the corresponding author's country and affiliation and citation count, citing source and keywords. Bibliometric network maps were constructed to determine the conceptual, intellectual and social collaborative structure over the past 50 years. The trending research topics and themes were identified. Results: The total number of articles and average citations has increased over the years. D Locker, AJ Spencer, A Sheiham and WM Thomson were the most frequently published authors, and PE Petersen, GD Slade and AI Ismail published papers with the highest citations. The most published countries were the United States, United Kingdom, Brazil and Canada, frequently engaging in collaborative efforts. The most common keywords used were 'dental caries', 'oral epidemiology' and 'oral health'. The trending topics were healthcare and health disparities, social determinants of health, systematic review and health inequalities. Epidemiology, oral health and disparities were highly researched areas. Conclusion: This bibliometric study reviews CDOE's significant contribution to dental public health by identifying key research trends, themes, influential authors and collaborations. The findings provide insights into the need to increase publications from developing countries, improve gender diversity in authorship and broaden the scope of research themes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The coronavirus pandemic and responses to it have had uneven impacts on different segments of societies. This study analysed the experiences of LGBTQIA+2 people during the COVID‐19 emergency, based on interviews in the United Kingdom and Brazil in 2020. The two countries are instructive cases, given the different social, cultural, economic, and political contexts. Pre‐existing marginalisation shaped COVID‐19 experiences in both settings, influencing the challenges faced, such as isolation or disruption to transgender healthcare, and coping strategies, including the important role of LGBTQIA+ volunteer and mutual aid groups. This paper argues that despite commonalities, there is no single LGBTQIA+ experience, and that disaster strategies will be ineffective until they recognise intersectionality and support the diversity of LGBTQIA+ populations. It concludes with a call for more inclusive disaster research, policy, and practice, which requires scrutinising the dominant cisgender–heteronormative structures that produce and reproduce LGBTQIA+ marginalisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]