Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Original article / research
Full Version
Awareness of Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery Among –Health Care Professionals – A Cross Sectional Study
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Sanjay Rastogi,MDS Oral&Maxillofacial Surgery,Manipal College of Medical Sciences,Manipal University.E-mail: dr_sr_no1@yahoo.com
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS), a dentistry specialty recognized by the Federal Dentistry Board in the mid-1960s, is responsible for the diagnosis, and clinical and surgical treatment of traumatic, congenital, developmental and iatrogenic lesions in the maxillofacial complex. Even today, difficulties are experienced owing to the lack of knowledge of the general public and health professionals concerning the scope of OMFS
A questionnaire survey of the perception of OMFS amongst 400 members of the general practitioners, general dentists, nursing students, and medical students is presented. Closed-ended format questions were designed to assess understanding of the range of conditions managed by Oral surgeons. The main objective was to ascertain how knowledgeable the medical/dental students, and health care professionals were about the diverse scope of surgical procedures that the oral and maxillofacial surgeon performs, and to improve the prognosis of different diseases.
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery;Awareness; Health care professionals
Introduction
Patients regularly present to their general practitioners (GPs), dentists, or emergency departments with abnormalities that require the expertise of specialists in oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). Ideally, these patients should be given a timely referral to the specialty, for prompt assessment and treatment (1), (2)
Despite the perception that the public is unfamiliar with what an oral and maxillofacial (OMF) surgeon does, there is currently no supporting evidence to confirm this. Although a survey by HUNTER et al(9) showed that 72% of the public had heard of the specialty, an earlier study conducted by AMEERALLY et al(1) in England, revealed that 79% of the general public had never heard of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS). A similar study, 10 years later, by IFEACHO et al (11), showed an increased awareness about the work undertaken by the specialty.
This lack of understanding is even more important, when it comes to health professionals. Patients regularly present to their dentists or emergency departments with abnormalities that require the expertise of specialists in OMFS. Our medical and dental colleagues need to have the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions about their patient’s management (13).
A similar survey was therefore done, to gain a better understanding concerning the public and health care professional’s perception of the specialty of oral and maxillofacial surgery in the NEPAL. The main objective was to ascertain how knowledgeable the medical/dental students and health care professionals were, about the diverse scope of surgical procedures that the oral and maxillofacial surgeon performs.
A cross-sectional study was performed among health care professionals in Manipal Teaching Hospital, Pokhra, and a tertiary care center in Nepal. A questionnaire (Table/Fig 1) was designed, that listed 15 clinical situations commonly encountered in the teaching hospital, and four different specialists. Respondents (Table/Fig 2) were asked to indicate who they would expect to treat them if they had one of a number of the specified conditions.
The 400 interviewees were divided into four groups: 100 dentists, 100 medical professionals, 100 nursing students and 100 medical students. Medical students and nursing students were in their final years of the clinical course at Manipal Teaching Hospital, under Kathmandu University. The medical professionals included physicians and surgeons from all the clinical specialties. The results were collected and analyzed using Microsoft Excel.
Objective
The questionnaire was intended to determine the percentage of respondents in each group that made the correct referral of patients presenting with different clinical situations.
The demographic data of the respondents were analyzed. The age range was similar in all four groups. The average age of the dental and medical professionals was 37 and 39 years respectively, while that of the nursing and medical students was 21 and 24 years, respectively. The results for the four groups of respondents are shown in (Table/Fig 3), (Table/Fig 4), (Table/Fig 5), (Table/Fig 6). Most respondents (60-100%) in all four groups would consult an OMFS for fracture of the mandible, maxilla and zygoma. In cases with nasal fracture, the referral patterns were more inclined (60%) towards the E.N.T. surgeon. Further, the oral and maxillofacial surgeon scored an absolute majority in clinical situations like dento-alveolar trauma (94%), dental implant (100%), removal of wisdom tooth (100%), lump in the mouth (84%) and mandibular reconstruction (76%). For cancer of the mouth, most respondents (62%) would prefer an OMF surgeon for treatment. There were some differences when it came to reconstructive surgery, in terms of what specialty would treat a cleft lip and cleft palate. About 32% were in the favor of an OMF surgeon, while 61% voted for a plastic surgeon for treating a case of cleft lip. Cases of cleft palate shared almost similar results.
When the name of the specialty of “oral surgery” was changed to “oral and maxillofacial surgery” in 1977, the intent was to more clearly delineate the scope of practice of the specialty to the public. Since that time, there has been considerable debate over whether this goal has been accomplished. In attempting to answer this question, it is important to know whether other specialties may have similar problems. The results of this study clearly indicate that this is not a problem faced by OMFS alone. Not only do many other specialties have similar problems with recognition of their scope, but perhaps, it is not possible for a brief name to describe exactly all of what any specialist does. Therefore, although this does not mean that there should not be efforts to inform the public about what oral and maxillofacial surgeons do, it does indicate that no name alone can ever be completely descriptive(13), (14)
This survey demonstrated that almost all of the medical and dental students and medical/dental practitioners had heard of the specialty of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Apparently, however, some students and professionals were not aware of the wide surgical scope of the specialty. A majority of health-care professionals recognize OMFS, but some students and professionals are not aware of the wide surgical field of the specialty (13), (14), (17), (22).
The adult and pediatric OMFS services in Nepal are centralized in Kathmandu and Pokhra, and serve a population of 10 million. Peripheral hospitals provide OMFS services through outpatient clinics and day-care facilities. The four principal emergency hospitals provide all aspects of OMFS and take referrals from all GPs and dentists in the area. Otolaryngology and plastic surgery are similarly organized.
AMEERALLY et al (1) stated that if patients are to receive the optimal treatment for oral and facial problems, dental and medical practitioners need to have a better understanding of what our specialty has to offer. OMFS has a long and complicated Latin name, and health coordinators have to be informed of the importance of this specialty in the management of complex and diverse problems within a well-defined anatomical area.
HUNTER et al (9) demonstrated that not surprisingly, most professionals like dental and medical students have heard of OMFS, but only a few realize the full scope of the specialty. They attribute this to a lack of publicity in the media, along with the fact that OMFS is grounded in dentistry rather than in medicine.
PARNES (20) stated that the governing bodies of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery formed a task force to discuss a possible name change for the specialty. Any change from the current name was rejected at that time. One of the concerns over changing the name was that another specialty of dentistry or medicine might adopt the abandoned name.
IFEACHO et al(11), noticed that recognition of OMFS among the general public and health professionals had increased (21–34%), and also, that the specialty had improved only marginally. Their results suggest that there was a clear division in the awareness between conditions relating to the mouth and those outside the mouth, in the head and neck region, despite the latter being well within the scope of OMFS.
LASKIN et al (15) evaluated the knowledge of 12 different specialties to determine whether such unfamiliarity is true only for OMFS, or whether it occurs with other specialties. The result of this study showed that name recognition was not a problem only for OMFS. Although this does not mean that no effort should be made to inform the public about what OMF surgeons do, it does indicate that no name alone can ever be completely descriptive (18), (22),(23).
In general, the above results show that there is a increasing trend towards the recognition of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery as a specialized branch for the treatment of the above mentioned conditions as compared to the past (3),(16),(21),(24),(25)
This survey was performed only in the Kathmandu and Pokhra areas, and therefore the results may not be applicable elsewhere. Regional variations exist, and surgeons are responsible for educating their own community and referral circles about the scope of their practice, which will depend on the training, experience and areas of interest. It is clear that greater progress needs to be made in the education of medical and dental students, as well as the general public, if the specialty of OMFS is to be practiced to its full potential(4),(5),(6),(9)
Awareness of the scope of OMFS should lead to improved access and efficient delivery of a quality service. Our medical and dental colleagues need to have the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions about their patient’s management. Equally, the public would benefit from knowing what OMFS offers them, so that they can request an appropriate referral.
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com