Volume 24 Nº 3
About the Journal
SCOPE AND POLICY
The Journal BRAZILIAN DENTAL SCIENCE is a trimonthly scientific internationally peerreviewed open access journal of the Sao Paulo State University – UNESP- Institute of Science and Technology of São José dos Campos, with a strong motto to promote advance research results for applications in Dentistry.
MISSION - To disseminate and promote rapid communication and interchange high-quality scientific information amongst the national and international academy, industry, and the dental practitioner, through basic and applied research.
POLICY - Editorial policy of Brazilian Dental Science (BDS) is to welcome submissions from academics throughout the world, rather than just publish research from Brazilian institutions or Brazilian academics, in the categories of Clinical Research, Laboratory Research, Short communications, Reviews, Clinical Techniques/Case Presentations and Invited Papers, as well as Editorials, Letters and Abstracts.
Online submission and editorial system available at BDS website.
Orofacial research scientists, materials scientists, clinicians, students of dentistry, and dental and medical device manufacturers.
CiteScore (updated in June 2021) Tracker 2021: 1.4 | Annual 2020: 1.3
ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING
CAPES Periodic Portal
The Brazilian Dental Science (2178-6011) is a continuation of the Pos-Graduação em Revista (1516-1501) and Ciência Odontológica Brasileira (1678-2046).
The Pos-Graduação em Revista was published between 1998-2002, continued from 2002 to 2012 as Ciência Odontológica Brasileira, and then, since 2013, as Brazilian Dental Science.
Its abbreviated title is Braz. Dent. Sci., and it should be used in bibliographies, footnotes, references, and bibliographic strips.
The Journal BRAZILIAN DENTAL SCIENCE is a trimonthly scientific internationally peerreviewed open access publication of the Sao Paulo State University – UNESP- Institute of Science and Technology of São José dos Campos, with a strong motto to promote advance research applications in Dentistry.
Brazilian Dental Science (BDS) publishes original scientific articles, invited reviews, reviews in general (systematic, meta-analysis, critical review, state of the art reviews, etc), short communications, editorials, letter to the editor, series of cases and case reports, which provide an international readership with up-to-date results of basic and clinical studies in the field of oral and maxillofacial science and aims to clarify the relevance of these results for a modern practice.
Manuscript submission and publishing at BDS are free of charge
To submit a manuscript for BDS, it is necessary to register in the website, providing a login and password. Important: Before concluding the registration form, please certify that the option author of the "Register as" item is checked. Once registered as author, enter 'User Home' (third link at the top menu), then enter 'author' and 'start a new submission.' The manuscripts should be written in concise and clear English for a proper comprehension.
There is no limit for authors in the paper. However, all activities of the co-authors must be clarified in the title page.
Research in humans must provide the protocol number of the Institutional Review Board in the "Material and Methods" session of the manuscript. The original document must be attached in a separate file to guarantee a blind revision.
Editors and reviewers spend many hours reading manuscripts, and therefore they appreciate receiving material that has been carefully prepared in accordance with these Instructions to Authors.
The Editor and Publisher reserve the right to make minimal literary corrections for the sake of clarity. Authors for whom English is not the first language should have their manuscripts read by colleagues fluent in English. If extensive English corrections are needed, authors may be charged for the cost of editing or an English certificate revision will be request.
Manuscripts which are not written in fluent English will be rejected automatically without refereeing.
A plagiarism detection will be performed in the beginning of the process by the assistant editors of BDS team. A match percentage of less than 25% is recommended.
Authors are required to suggest two potential reviewers for their submitted article (name and email address are required). Reviewers must have no conflict of interest with manuscript. Authors must pay attention in this recommendation. Find potential reviewers from a country different from yours.
Authors are responsible for the content originality of manuscripts;
Manuscripts should not be submitted to other journals until a final decision is issued;
Authors are individuals who effectively contributed to the study, being familiar with its
Authors should declare they have read the final version of the manuscript and assume the responsibility for its contents (copyright transfer with original signature).
Always keep a backup copy of the electronic file for reference and safety.
For further guidance on electronic submission, please visit the BDS website.
This Journal adopts Creative Commons license CC-BY:
"This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation. This is the most accommodating of licenses offered. Recommended for maximum dissemination and use of licensed materials."
This journal has no page charges.
PUBLICATIONS ETHICS AND MALPRACTICES – BDS
Ethical standards for publication exist to ensure high-quality scientific publications, public trust in scientific findings, and that people receive credit for their work and ideas.
All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are expected to meet standards of academic excellence. If approved by the editor, submissions will be considered by peer reviewers, whose identities will remain anonymous to the authors.
Our Research Integrity team will occasionally seek advice outside standard peer review, for example, on submissions with serious ethical, security, biosecurity, or societal implications. We may consult experts and the academic editor before deciding on appropriate actions, including but not limited to recruiting reviewers with specific expertise, assessment by additional editors, and declining to further consider a submission.
A. Relations with the other editors/editorial board
The editor-in-chief will work with a team of section editors. They will confirm the roles and responsibilities of all editors and editorial staff (assistant editors), so that everybody is clear about who does what.
The editorial board will be invited by the editors according with their expertise and levels of activity and involvement. BDS journal has a policy of appointing editors for a fixed time period, and the editorial committee will discuss possible changes if necessary.
Changes in the direction of the journal to redefine its scope must be undertaken in agreement with the other editors and the publisher; otherwise editorial decisions may be inconsistent. New aims and scope need to be agreed on and clearly published in whatever medium the journal uses to communicate with authors, reviewers, and editors.
Authors must not use the words, figures, or ideas of others without attribution. All sources must be cited at the point they are used, and reuse of wording must be limited and be attributed or quoted in the text.
Brazilian Dental Science uses Turnitin to detect submissions that overlap with published and submitted manuscripts.
Manuscripts that are found to have been plagiarized from a manuscript by other authors, whether published or unpublished, will be rejected.
Authorship and acknowledgments
All listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript, approved its claims, and agreed to be an author. It is important to list everyone who made a significant scientific contribution. Author contributions must be described on the Title Page, using roles defined by CRediT. Changes in authorship must be declared to the journal and agreed to by all authors.
Anyone who contributed to the research or manuscript preparation, but is not an author, should be acknowledged with their permission.
Submissions by anyone other than one of the authors will not be considered.
Conflicts of interest
Conflicts of interest (COIs, also known as ‘competing interests’) occur when issues outside research could be reasonably perceived to affect the neutrality or objectivity of the work or its assessment. This can happen at any stage in the research cycle, including during the experimentation phase, while a manuscript is being written, or during the process of turning a manuscript into a published article.
If unsure, declare a potential interest or discuss with the editorial office. Submissions with undeclared conflicts that are later revealed may be rejected.
Conflicts of interest do not always stop work from being published or prevent someone from being involved in the review process. However, they must be declared. A clear declaration of all possible conflicts – whether they actually had an influence or not – allows others to make informed decisions about the work and its review process.
If conflicts of interest are found after publication, this may be embarrassing for the authors, the Editor and the journal. It may be necessary to publish a corrigendum or reassess the review process.
Conflicts include the following:
Financial — funding and other payments, goods and services received or expected by the authors relating to the subject of the work or from an organization with an interest in the outcome of the work
Affiliations — being employed by, on the advisory board for, or a member of an organization with an interest in the outcome of the work
Intellectual property — patents or trademarks owned by someone or their organization
Personal — friends, family, relationships, and other close personal connections
Ideology — beliefs or activism, for example, political or religious, relevant to the work
Academic — competitors or someone whose work is critiqued
B. Relation with authors
Authors must declare all potential interests in a ‘Conflicts of interest’ section, which should explain why the interest may be a conflict. If there are none, the authors should state “The author(s) declare(s) that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.” Submitting authors are responsible for coauthors declaring their interests.
Authors must declare current or recent funding (including article processing charges) and other payments, goods or services that might influence the work. All funding, whether a conflict or not, must be declared in the ‘Funding Statement’.
The involvement of anyone other than the authors who 1) has an interest in the outcome of the work; 2) is affiliated to an organization with such an interest; or 3) was employed or paid by a funder, in the commissioning, conception, planning, design, conduct, or analysis of the work, the preparation or editing of the manuscript, or the decision to publish must be declared.
Declared conflicts of interest will be considered by the editor and reviewers and included in the published article.
The editors recommend that the authors pay attention to the current guidelines. These instructions should clearly state what is expected of authors and what the journal will do in cases of suspected misconduct such as plagiarism or data fabrication. The authors should consult the link to the COPE flowcharts (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts) and Retraction Guidelines
(http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines). BDS provides in its website a “check list” of what is expected from authors to maintain standards of manuscripts.
Decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication will be based only on the paper’s
importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the remit of the journal.
Transparency (a checklist to authors)
Work with the journal publisher/editorial office to determine processes for handling submissions that are the most efficient and appropriate for the journal. The electronic submission system aids authors in providing all required information (e.g., authorship declarations, funding information). All elements must be completed before a manuscript is sent for peer review (chasing details at a later stage can delay publication and upset schedules). BDS will consider checking for the following elements (as appropriate):
Confirmation that the authors have read and understood the Instructions to Authors
Authorship statement explaining what each author contributed to the paper
Competing interests declaration
Permission obtained for use of copyrighted material from other sources (including the Web)
Documentation for any citations to unpublished work (e.g., articles in press/personal communications)
Confirmation that the manuscript is under evaluation solely to BDS and it is not published, in press, or submitted elsewhere.
BDS adopts and promotes an authorship policy that is appropriate to the field of research. This will include:
requiring statements of each individual’s contribution to the research and publication
use of checklists to prevent ghost authorship (see PLoS:
requiring all authors to sign an authorship declaration
including all authors in communications (e.g., acknowledging receipt of a submission), not just the corresponding author
clearly specifying authorship criteria in the Instructions to Authors For biomedical journals you might consider in addition:
Details of ethical approval and informed consent for studies in humans
Details of approval and ethical conduct for animal experimentation
Guidance on ethical approval for studies in humans is available from COPE (Guidance for Editors: Research, Audit and Service Evaluations: http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).
C. Editors and Reviewers
Editors and reviewers should decline to be involved with a submission when they
Have a recent publication or current submission with any author
Share or recently shared an affiliation with any author
Collaborate or recently collaborated with any author
Have a close personal connection to any author
Have a financial interest in the subject of the work
Feel unable to be objective
Editors and reviewers must declare if they have previously discussed the manuscript with the authors.
BDS provides guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them. Guidelines are available in our website and from COPE (COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).
This guidance is regularly updated and is referred to the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines (http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct). BDS will consider the following points:
Reviews should be conducted objectively
Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate
Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and references as necessary and not be defamatory or libelous
Reviewers should declare any competing interests
Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts in which they have a competing interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers
Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of material supplied to them and may not discuss unpublished manuscripts with colleagues or use the information in their own work
Any reviewer that wants to pass a review request onto a colleague must get the editor’s permission beforehand.
BDS has systems for assessing the performance of reviewers and removing from the database those whose performance is not acceptable.
BDS also has systems in place to ensure that peer reviewers’ identities are protected.
Reviewers will be asked to address ethical aspects of the submission such as:
Has the author published this research before?
Has the author plagiarized another publication?
Is the research ethical and have the appropriate approvals/consent been obtained?
Is there any indication that the data have been fabricated or inappropriately manipulated?
Have the authors declared all relevant competing interests?
Reviewers must declare any remaining interests in the ‘Confidential’ section of the review form, which will be considered by the editor.
Studies involving humans or animals
If the work involves the use of human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments involving humans.
Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
All animal experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelines and should be carried out in accordance with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, 1986 and associated guidelines, EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments, or the National Institutes of Health guide for the care and use of Laboratory animals (NIH Publications No. 8023, revised 1978) and the authors should clearly indicate in the manuscript that such guidelines have been followed. The sex of animals must be indicated, and where appropriate, the influence (or association) of sex on the results of the study.
Institutional review board and written informed consent
For protocols involving the use of human subjects, authors should indicate in their Methods section that subjects’ rights have been protected by an appropriate Institutional Review Board and written informed consent was granted from all subjects. When laboratory animals are used, indicate the level of institutional review and assurance that the protocol ensured humane practices.
Brazilian Dental Science asks that authors submitting manuscripts reporting from a clinical trial to register the trial a priori in any clinical trials registries that takes part of WHO network (International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP)). The clinical trial registration number and name of the trial register should be included in the Acknowledgments at the submission stage.
Randomized control clinical trials
Randomized clinical trials should be reported using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT). A CONSORT checklist and flowchart (as a Figure) should also be completed and included in the submission material.
Epidemiological observational trials
Submitting authors of epidemiological human observations studies are required to review and submit a 'strengthening the reporting of observational studies in Epidemiology' (STROBE) checklist and statement. Compliance with this should be detailed in the materials and methods section.
The abstract and main body of the systematic review should be reported using the PRISMA for Abstract and PRISMA guidelines respectively. Authors submitting a systematic review should register the protocol in a readily-accessible source at the time of project inception (e.g. PROSPERO database, previously published review protocol in journal, OSF). The protocol registration number, name of the database or journal reference should be provided at the submission stage in the “Registration” section in the abstract and ‘Methods’ section in the main body of the text. A PRISMA checklist and flow diagram (as a Figure) should also be included in the submission material. Source of funding (grant number, if available) should be added in ‘Acknowledgments’ section.
D. The peer-review process
The number of reviewers will be defined by the editors according to the complexity of the manuscript, with a minimum of two reviewers. The affiliations are masked, and the reviewers must complete a checklist/form within 21 days after review acceptance. Reviewers can also attach files with their comments to the authors and to the editors.
BDS has systems to ensure that material submitted to the journal remains confidential while under review.
Additionally, BDS ensures that peer review is undertaken in a timely fashion so that authors do not experience undue delays. The process is monitored regularly to increase efficiency.
If the comments are considered inappropriate or insufficient by the editors, another reviewer must be assigned.
If there is a conflict (doubt) between the opinions of the reviewers, a person from the editorial assistant consultant board will be assigned for the third opinion. The final decision will rest with the editor.
The website allows us to choose different rounds among questions by reviewers and answers by the authors. The acceptance or rejection of the manuscript must be made by the section editors and or the journal editor after a deep analysis of these rounds.
The possible results after the discussion of any controversial cases may be: the rejection of the manuscript; a new round of required revisions (minor or major requirements); professional proofreading of the English by a native speaker with a proofreading certificate; acceptance of the manuscript.
Responding to possible misconduct/inappropriate behavior and dealing with complaints
The COPE Code of Conduct will guide the editors in cases of suspected misconduct, even for
submissions they do not intend to publish.
COPE’s flowcharts (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts)
In cases of plagiarism, data fabrication, or an authorship dispute, BDS will notify other editors directly involved in dealing with the manuscript and inform the publisher. Editors may consult the COPE and other guidance:
BDS will also deal with publishing corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed. Retractions will follow the COPE’s guidance on retractions (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).
Sources of Support
Visit the BDS website to find the answers you need or contact us. You can also check the status of your submitted article or find out when your accepted article will be published.
When required, the authors must contact one of these English Reviewers below for professional proofreading of the final text, before publication.
Enid Rosenstiel firstname.lastname@example.org
Louis Vega email@example.com
More information about the publishing system, Platform and Workflow by OJS/PKP
This journal uses Open Journal Systems 188.8.131.52, which is open source journal management and publishing software developed, supported, and freely distributed by the Public Knowledge Project under the GNU General Public License.