Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
FROM THE EDITORíS DESK
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 17  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 173

From the Editor's Desk


Editor JIAPHD, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Government Dental College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Date of Submission20-Aug-2019
Date of Acceptance20-Aug-2019
Date of Web Publication12-Sep-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. K R Sowmya
Editor JIAPHD, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Government Dental College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jiaphd.jiaphd_94_19

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Sowmya K R. From the Editor's Desk. J Indian Assoc Public Health Dent 2019;17:173

How to cite this URL:
Sowmya K R. From the Editor's Desk. J Indian Assoc Public Health Dent [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Dec 15];17:173. Available from: http://www.jiaphd.org/text.asp?2019/17/3/173/266767



Greetings!

Welcome to the third issue of the year 2019!

I sincerely thank all the authors, reviewers, editorial board members, office bearers of IAPHD, all the members, Medknow, and readers for extending their continuous support and cooperation for bringing out the third issue of the year 2019 successfully.

Most of the articles submitted to this journal get rejected as they are most of the times literature review. Systematic reviews are always superior to these reviews as they use a precise question to produce evidence to underpin a piece of research, a stand-alone piece of research, which should be conducted before undertaking further research, whereas a literature review introduces context and current thinking, often without a specific question, is general and covers several aspects of a topic. Systematic review searches of several specified databases using precise search terms; a similar systematic search of grey literature sometimes included, depending on the question whereas narrative review finds papers through a fairly random process, usually searching only a few databases, use of grey literature common, but not usually systematic. In a systematic review, data extraction tool is used to identify precise pieces of information and two or more researchers undertake data extraction, but in narrative reviews, papers are read and “take-home” messages are used in the review. Recognized, referenced methods for data analysis are included analysis of methods, rigor of conduct of research, and strength of evidence in systematic reviews, whereas in narrative reviews, writer interprets the meaning of the results. Outcomes in systematic reviews are based on evidence from reviewed papers, whereas in narrative reviews, they are through the evidence of various kinds of conclusions drawn from included papers. Thus, with all the above points, a systematic review might be suitable for publication whereas a narrative review is not suitable for publication. We request that the authors conduct more and more systematic reviews in different research areas and submit the same to our journal by the following standard guidelines and checklists for the same.

I take this opportunity to congratulate all the freshly passed out postgraduate students of Public Health Dentistry.






 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed457    
    Printed58    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded90    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]