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
Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Survey on Special Care Dentistry: A Cross-sectional Study
Correspondence Address :
A Srividya,
No. 26, Aravind Flats Balaji Colony, Velachery, Chennai-600042, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: asrividya93@gmail.com
Introduction: Special Care Dentistry (SCD) is a dentistry branch that advocates equal dental Patient with Special Care Needs (PSCN). In several countries, it is a separate specialty. In India, it is still in its infancy. Few studies have explored the dentists' perception regarding SCD.
Aim: To determine the knowledge and attitude about SCD, also the practice measures followed by the dentists in Chennai colleges.
Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional observational study was conducted in three dental colleges in Chennai from September 2019 to October 2019. A total of 230 dentists were enrolled using random sampling. A set of 20 close ended multiple choice questions were formulated and administered to dentists {Undergraduates (UGs) and Postgraduates (PGs)}. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square test was performed using MATLAB software (Mathworks, 2015), with p<0.05.
Results: A 78.8% of respondents got good scores of ≥7 in knowledge based questions, 25.6% of the participants showed overall positive attitude. Educational qualification did not affect respondents’ knowledge and attitude about SCD (p>0.05). Only 21.95% of UGs and 22.31% of the PGs have good self-confidence in treating patients with special needs. More than 80% have not administered Domiciliary Care (DC). A total of 65% of participants denied getting any training in their UGs/PGs curriculum.
Conclusion: Dentists in the present study are aware about SCD. Clinical measures adopted by dentists and their confidence in treating these patients are suboptimal. Training in SCD should become integral part of future dental education.
Disabled population, Domiciliary care, People with special care needs, Special children, Special needs dentistry
Special needs Dentistry/SCD is the management of oral health, especially for patients with special needs, by employing alternate methods (1). The Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA) considers patients with special needs to be medically, physically, psychologically and socially incapacitated. It recommends specialised training for oral health professionals (2). The British Society of Disability and Oral Health (2006) advocates equal and DC for Special Care Needs (SCN) patients (3).
Census 2011 (updated 2016) shows that India houses 2% of the world’s disabled population (4). According to the Welfare of Differently Abled Tamil Nadu, Chennai’s disabled population is 90,064. The absence of proper oral health care for SCN in India can be attributed to the physical, geographical, and economic barriers accompanied by inadequate clinical infrastructure and sparse training among dentists (5),(6).
Despite the staggering number of dentists in India, World Health Organisation (WHO) 2014 data showed dentists’ ratio to population is 1:10000. Fewer still are trained in treating patients with special needs (5),(7). All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) and WHO gave oral healthcare guidelines for PSCN; yet, more concrete initiatives are imperative. SCD is also not part of the academic curriculum given by the Dental Council of India for dental students (8).
Studies exploring the awareness and practice among dentists towards SCD are scarce. The present study is the first multicentric Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) survey conducted amongst dentists and students in academic settings. The current KAP survey aimed to assess the knowledge and practice measures adopted by dentists in Chennai and to know the various treatment modalities followed by dentists in treating PSCN.
The present cross-sectional observational study was conducted in SRM University, Ramapuram, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India between September 2019 to October 2019, following the Institutional Review Board’s Ethical Committe approval (RMU/M&HS/SRMDC/2019/PG/007). The reporting of the study followed “STROBE Statement” (9), and a total of 230 participants were included in the study. The study was explained in detail and informed written consent was obtained from the study participants.
Questionnaire
A set of 20 multiple choices (close ended) questions were formulated after the literature search (1),(3),(10). The face and content validation (Content Validation Ration CVR= 0.60) of the questions were done by three oral medicine and two public health dentistry experts (11). Reliability was checked using the test-retest method. Based on the queries and suggestions received, few questions were revised and redistributed amongst the study sample. Overall reliability of the questionnaire was calculated using Cronbach’s alpha and was found to be 0.71 (12). The revised set of 20 questions, as shown in [Annexure 1], were divided into three groups Knowledge (5), Attitude (6), and Practice (9) based questions.
Sample size calculation: Sample size was manually calculated based on the previous survey with prevalance=6.44 Q=1-p 35.6 L precision of the estimate=6.44 Zα=standard normal variate 2=3.84 (13). The present study was conducted among dental students (UGs and PGs) and faculty of three different dental colleges in Chennai, based on the following inclusion and exclusion criteria:
Inclusion criteria: All dentists with at least one year of clinical experience, dentists who were working in colleges, interns attending clinics (UGs), Postgraduate students (PGs) were included in the study.
Exclusion criteria: Dentists with no clinical experience and not working in any institution, duplicate answers, incomplete answers and participants not willing to participate in the study were excluded from the study.
Data Collection
The printed forms were distributed among the voluntary participants. knowledge and attitude based questions were scored with minimum score for each question being 1 and maximum being 5. Opinion based questions were scored using Likert scale (1-5) (14). Scores of knowledge and attitude based questions were added to get an overall score. Overall score was then multiplied by 0.4 and was plotted using a cumulative graph on a scale of 1-10. Participants with score ≥7 was categorised as good knowledge score. Similarly, the scores ≥7 was considered as positive attitude.
Statistical Analysis
Descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests were performed using MATLAB Software (MathsWorks, 2015). Chi-square test was performed to assess the effect of educational qualification on knowledge and Attitude of respondents towards SCD (p-value ≤0.05).
Final data included 205 out of 230 data samples with a response rate of 89.13%. A total of 25 forms were excluded (13 incomplete records, and 12 duplicate answers). Out of 205 respondents, 121 were PGs and 84 were UGs.
Knowledge among Dentists about SCD
A 78.8% of the participants scored ≥7, for knowledge based questions, as shown in (Table/Fig 1). Around 52% UGs and 48% PGs were not aware of the colleges, which offer a course in SCD in India. Majority of the participants (34.15% UGs, 23.97% PGs) were unaware about the practice of DC, as shown in (Table/Fig 2).
Attitude about SCD
A 25.6% dentists scored ≥7 in attitude-based questions (Table/Fig 3). Both PGs and UGs (32.32%, 39.02%) were moderately satisfied with the disability confidence among the dentists in handling special needs patients. While PGs (39.67%) were willing to enroll in SCD course if offered in India, UGs (31.70%) were mostly indecisive. Maximum participants (71.95% UGs, 61.15% PGs) felt the clinical infrastructure for treating PSCN is of fair quality (Table/Fig 4).
Practices Followed by Dentists for PSCN
Most of the respondents (64.41% PGs, 63.41% UGs) answered they had not received any specific training for SCD. Most of the participants (81.70% UGs, 78.69% PGs) had never given DC. Dentists (68.30% UGs, 51.24% PGs), majorly don’t have any specialised equipment in their clinics for treating PSCN (Table/Fig 5).
Association between Educational Qualification and Awareness about SCD
Chi-square test showed no relation between educational qualification (UGs or PGs) and knowledge and attitude of the respondents towards SCD with p=0.519 and p=0.184, respectively (Table/Fig 6).
More elders and disabled people are retaining their natural dentition, which necessitates modifications in routine dental procedures which benefits them (15). Environmental and attitudinal factors are the main barriers that restrict disabled people from getting equal dental care (16). There is a need to have a patient-centric approach towards treatment planning preceded by evidence-based dentistry (10). Dental colleges and academia are the main source of information about SCD. They should include virtual workshops, CDEs, hands on training on SCD as integral part of education, thus empowering students with the confidence to treat PSCN (8).
There are several international surveys conducted among dental healthcare workers about SCD, but only few studies has been conducted in India (Table/Fig 7), especially in dental colleges (2),(13),(15),(17),(18),(19),(20),(21),(22),(23),(24),(25). There is a need to know the level of awareness among students and academicians about SCD.
The participants in the current study had good knowledge about SCD. Majority of the dentists showed neutral to positive attitude towards SCD. Despite this, there is a lack of appropriate clinical infrastructure and training among dentists, which hinders the proper oral healthcare opportunities for PSCN. In this study, knowledge and attitude of the participants were not affected by their educational qualification.
Majority of the participants have moderate level disability confidence in treating SCN patients and are willing to undergo training and attend CDEs if offered in India. The results are similar with that of a survey conducted by Watters AL et al., and Kapoor S et al., (22),(23).
Lack of training and education in the curriculum is the primary deterrent for building confidence among dentists (16). Participants in the present study scored good in knowledge based questions which is in contrast to study by Salama F et al., where only 5% of students had moderate knowledge about SCD (24).
Majority of the participants have limited clinical exposure and have never given DC to patients. Similar to the study by Chadha G et al., dentists in the present study have never attended any formal training during their academic curriculum for SCD and feel the need of more exposure to SCN patients in college life (13). This is in contrast to the study by Kapoor S et al., where students had attended lectures on SCD in their college (23). The participants, share neutral to positive attitude towards SCD, but physical barriers hinder them in providing better oral health care, as also seen by Dighole MS et al., in their study (25).
Limitation(s)
The study’s limitations include a cross-sectional study design, and the smaller sample size, which prevents the generalisation of the results. The close ended format of questionnaire might have lead to response bias.
Participants in the present study had good knowledge about SCD and are open to new information. They lacked practical experience and confidence. Inclusion of SCD in academic curriculum and more clinical exposure will ameliorate students’ attitude and help in building their confidence while treating patients with special needs. Further studies with larger sample size and with pre and posteducational training should be conducted. Studies with evidence-based treatment modifications pertaining to SCD should be encouraged.
10.7860/JCDR/2021/48479.15145
Date of Submission: Jan 11, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Mar 02, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Mar 31 , 2021
Date of Publishing: Jul 01, 2021
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? No
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. No
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jan 12, 2021
• Manual Googling: Mar 26, 2021
• iThenticate Software: May 06, 2021 (6%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
- 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