• Users Online: 638
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Contacts Login 
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 7-10

Quality of the materials and methods section of original dental research articles published in the iranian and international journals

1 Department of Business Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Assoc. Prof. Sedigheh Bakhtiari
Department of Oral Medicine, School of Dental, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/dmr.dmr_32_17

Rights and Permissions

Background and Objectives: Lack of scientific writing skills is believed to be a major obstacle in the course of research publication and dissemination by the Iranian researchers. Without following the globally accepted publication standards, dissertations, and projects cannot reach their final goal of being published and incorporated into practice. We aimed to compare the writing quality of a number of dental original articles written in Farsi and published in the Iranian journals with those written in English and published in international journals. Materials and Methods: In this analytical cross-sectional study, we selected 64 articles from six dental journals (three international English journals and three Farsi journals) by simple random sampling method. A list of 48 variables covering the study design, sampling method, subject allocation, ethical issues, interventions, measurements, and statistical methods was used to evaluate each article. The results were analyzed using Chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Results: Our results demonstrated that Farsi articles (n = 32) fulfilled 61.1% of our checklist criteria while English articles (n = 32) achieved a score of 59.1%, with no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). Conclusion: We believe that the selected articles successfully reported most of the necessary elements. Their main shortcoming seemed to be the lack of clarification of details.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded458    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal