An Analysis of Papers Published in the British and European Journals of Orthodontics

Abstract

Objectives To identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and compare papers published in two orthodontic journals. Design A retrospective, observational study. Setting The British Journal of Orthodontics (BJO) and European Journal of Orthodontics (EJO). Data source Papers published between 1989 and 1993. Method A hand search of all papers was performed. The type, subject, setting and methods of each paper were classified and recorded. Results 200 papers were identified in BJO and 275 in EJO. Six RCTs were identified which represents 2·8 per cent of clinical research papers. Significant differences were found between the type (P < 0·001), subject (P < 0·001), setting (P < 0·01), and methods (P < 0·05) of papers published in the two Journals. More papers in BJO were case reports clinical opinions, and update articles, and reported on orthodontic materials or assessed methods of measuring the outcome of treatment. Ninety per cent of papers in EJO reported the results of research projects. More papers were related to animal studies; were laboratory based or epidemiological. Conclusion Despite the RCT being regarded as the ‘Gold Standard’ for the evaluation of therapeutic interventions and materials only six (5.1 per cent) of such studies used this method. Significant differences in the type, setting and subject of papers published in BJO and EJO between 1989 and 1993 were found.