1. Introduction
A dentist is a healthcare professional who evaluates, diagnoses, prevents and treats disorders, diseases or conditions affecting the mouth, maxillofacial area and its related and adjacent structures [
1,
2]. The scope of dental practice goes beyond clinical intervention alone; it also includes public health intervention, policy making, and research [
3,
4,
5]. About half of the world’s population requires the services of a dentist—about 2.3 billion, 796 million, and 267 million people have untreated dental caries of succedaneous teeth, severe periodontal disease, and tooth loss, respectively [
1]. This shows that the global burdens of oral conditions and oral health needs are enormous.
Unfortunately, there is a short supply of dentists globally. According to the World Health Organization data, about 1.6 million dentists currently serve the world population [
6,
7]. It is also worrisome that inequalities exist in the regional distribution of the dentistry workforce [
6]. By estimation, more than two-thirds of the dentists in the world are in Europe (27.9%) and the Americas (41.5%), while only one percent of them are in Africa [
6]. The Americas have the narrowest population-to-dentist ratio (one dentist to 1400 people), while Africa has the widest ratio (one dentist to 40,000 people) [
6]. This shortage of dentists perpetuates the global inequality in accessibility to dentists and the utilisation of dental care services.
The current inequalities in the global distribution of dentists is worrisome. Pertinently, it would be more worrisome if a similar situation exists in the global trends and patterns of information search and research interests on dentists, as such information gives a reflection of the inequalities concerning oral health literacy, priorities, and uptake across the globe [
8,
9,
10,
11,
12]; however, empirical evidence of this is currently lacking. Therefore, the provision of evidence for this area is crucial as it enhances the in-depth understanding of the trends and patterns of global awareness, knowledge, utilisation, priorities, and interests concerning dentists and oral health services.
The internet is a significant medium used for searching out or disseminating information [
11,
12]; it is also a commonly used data source for analysing search and research interests concerning a phenomenon of interest. Global search interests on dentists can be evaluated through an infoveillance study while a bibliometric study can evaluate the global research interest [
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20,
21,
22,
23,
24]. An infoveillance study uses internet search data to monitor search interests on a topic [
13,
14]. Google, Twitter, TikTok, or Instagram search data are the most utilised data for infoveillance studies [
13,
14,
15,
16,
17]. On the other hand, a bibliometric study seeks to quantify the research interests on a topic by evaluating the metrics (obtained from electronic databases) of the researchers, institutions, and countries sourcing or funding the research outputs on such a topic [
18,
19,
20,
21,
22,
23,
24]. Furthermore, bibliometric analysis helps to illustrate the trend of research outputs, identify hotspots, and summarise the volume and influence of literature published on a topic of interest [
18].
This study aims to quantify and qualify the volume and patterns of global public search and research on dentists through the application of infoveillance and bibliometric research approaches. This study is of huge public health significance, as the findings obtained will provide the crucial information needed for the deeper understanding of public and researchers’ interests and priority areas on dentists, particularly in the areas of online information dissemination and consumption practices in dentistry. Furthermore, this study’s findings will pave the way for future research and policies relevant to the scope and practice of dentistry.
4. Discussion
The findings obtained in this study are noteworthy and of huge relevance to global public health and policy development, and with noteworthy implications to clinicians, dental researchers, and oral health communities. To start with, the overall growth trends in the volume of global search and research on dentists has increased within the past decades (
Figure 2 and
Figure 4), and these trends corroborate the existing reports on the increasing rate of global awareness of dentists and oral healthcare services. Many factors might have been responsible for this growth trend; however, the most notable factor was the recent strengthening of oral health systems in many countries of the world, especially those in the Global South—a typical example was the recent establishment of dental institutions in many African and Asian countries (including Qatar, Rwanda, etc.) which have significantly improved dental research productivity, the supply and demand of dentists and dental care services, and the development of various dental public health interventions and policies in those countries [
1,
6,
8,
9]. Another important factor was the advent and global spread of the internet facility which might have encouraged information searching and dissemination practices for dentists. Overall, this finding affirms that dentists and dental researchers should consider the regular use of internet services in educating the global communities on issues pertaining to oral health, as this medium has a large and steadily growing audience.
However, a comparative review of the trends of global searches and research on dentists (
Figure 2 and
Figure 4) with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that the pandemic played an influential role. A sharp decline in online searches for dentists was observed during the first episode of the COVID-19 lockdown [
33,
34,
35,
36], with an overall slight decline since the pandemic; this suggests that the public health regulations imposed during the pandemic might have reduced public interest in seeking professional dental care services, as the delivery of such services was significantly impaired during the pandemic. However, the opposite was observed for research productivity on dentists Prior to the pandemic, there was a progressive decline in the volume of journal publications on dentists; however, during the pandemic, there was a resurgence. During the early months of the pandemic, several institutions were temporarily closed due to the enforcement of public health protection regulations [
33,
34,
35,
36], and this might have given many researchers ample time to produce a huge volume of journal papers exploring dentist-related research topics. Overall, this finding shows that an infectious disease pandemic and lockdowns can have a far-reaching impact on oral health communication involving dentists, dental researchers, and the global public. Hence, this recommends the need for the development of a robust strategy addressing dental public health communications and research against future pandemics.
The volume of research productivity and online searches on dentists was very low in the Global South, compared to the Global North (
Figure 3 and
Figure 6). This huge disparity may be due to the higher (digital) literacy rates, deeper internet penetrance, narrower dentist–population ratio, and greater wealth (
Table 1) in the Global North countries compared to the Global South countries [
6]. Furthermore, in the Global South, South America was the continent having the highest proportion of countries with an SVI lower than one while Africa was the continent having the highest proportion of countries with very little or no research productivity on dentists; this further shows that research and search interests about dentists are poorest in these parts of the Global South. It is also notable that the top ten countries, institutions, journals, and authors funding/sourcing journal articles concerning dentists were in the Global North (
Table 5,
Table 6,
Table 7 and
Table 8). Obviously, this is an inequality gap which needs to be closed. To do so, it is recommended that the Global South countries should dedicate more resources to dental public health services and research. Notable examples of the resources needed to reduce this inequality include the provision of more research funding for dental research and training, the development and implementation of international policies and strategies that encourage the development of dental research and training in the Global South countries.
There are several reasons why the global public searched for dentists on the internet (
Table 2 and
Table 3). However, the online booking of an appointment with a dentist is one of the predominant reasons; this is based on the contextual interpretation of the commonest search terms used (e.g., “dentist near me”, “dentist open near me”, etc.). The other pertinent issues for which the global public searched for dentists were on dental care insurance, affordable dental care, dental emergencies, child dental care, and gaming. Based on the percentage increase in the rate of search queries and topics on these topics and queries, it can be asserted, without doubt, that there has been a huge increase in the global awareness, knowledge and utilisation rates of dentists and dental care services; by implication, this suggests that the global efforts towards improving oral healthcare have been working so far. In addition to the afore-mentioned, these findings also pinpoint the areas of concern to the global public.
It is also noteworthy that inequalities exist in the volume of research papers produced across various academic disciplines concerning dentists (
Figure 5). Medicine and Dentistry were the two disciplines with the highest volume of research on dentists; however, this finding is not surprising as they are the most closely related disciplines to the dental profession. The papers produced in other disciplines were very few. Perhaps, researchers in the non-medical or non-dental disciplines might not have produced many papers on dentist-relevant issues probably because they felt it was non-relevant to their field. However, dentist-relevant research findings from these disciplines (e.g., “Decision Sciences” and “Economics, Econometrics and Finance”) are crucial to the organisational and economic planning and development of dental care, practice, policy, and interventions. Therefore, there is an essential need to rejuvenate the productivity of non-dental/non-medical disciplines on research projects relevant to the dental profession. By so-doing, dentists, oral health policy makers, and other relevant stakeholders will have access to a richer body of evidence needed for decision-making processes.
The key areas of scientific interest among researchers investigating dentists were diverse cutting across several specialisations in dentistry (
Figure 7). However, only very little to no interest exists for legal dentistry, as evidenced by the network visualisation of the commonly occurring keywords. Legal dentistry is a newly emerging aspect of the dental profession and only a few countries—including Australia, the UK, and the USA—are officially practising legal dentistry [
39,
40,
41]. Furthermore, it was observed that prosthodontics was the most investigated dental specialisation area while conservative dentistry was the least investigated; this finding does not align with the recent statistics for the global burden of oral conditions because dental caries of the succedaneous teeth are the leading oral health condition globally and are primarily managed by general dentists and conservative dentists [
1]. Prosthodontist care is primarily focused on the prosthetic replacement of missing orofacial structures including teeth [
42]. However, the magnitude of the current global prevalent burden of dental caries is the greatest while the burden of tooth loss is just about one-tenth of that of the dental caries burden [
1]. Overall, this suggests that a misplacement of priority exists in the research productivity in this area. Therefore, it is recommended that research productivity on conservative dentists and conservative dental care services should be given the highest priority.
However, this study has its limitations. Firstly, this study adopted the use of only one data source—Google Trends—for the infoveillance study; therefore, data from other search engines (e.g., Bing.com, etc.,) were not utilised. Google may not be the predominant search engine in all countries; for example, North Korea and China. It is possible that those countries may be underrepresented based on the study data. Secondly, this study adopted the use of only one database—SCOPUS—for the bibliometric study; therefore, data from other databases (e.g., PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, etc.) were not utilised. As a result, there is a possibility that those publications not indexed in SCOPUS were by default excluded. Therefore, those authors, institutions, countries, journals, and disciplines sourcing/funding dentist-related research might have been underrepresented based on the study data.
Regardless of these limitations, this study has its strengths. First, this is the first study, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, to investigate the global search and research interests on dentists. Secondly, the two data sources used for this study were the biggest sources used for each study design; therefore, the possibility of missing information is minimal [
18,
25,
26,
27,
28,
29,
30,
31,
32]. Thirdly, the findings obtained in this study have provided deep insights into the hot and cold areas of interest among the global public and the global scientific community. These insights are essential for the evidence-based planning and development of dental public health and policy strategies targeting oral health literacy and behaviours.