The European Journal of Orthodontics Impact Factor & Information

Publisher: European Orthodontic Society, Oxford University Press (OUP)

Journal description

One of the leading periodicals in its field the European Journal of Orthodontics publishes scientific papers aimed at all orthodontists. The journal provides a forum for orthodontists in Europe where many developments are taking place but also accepts papers from all parts of the world. Clinical papers cover all techniques as well as different approaches to treatment planning. Research papers are of direct relevance to the clinician and extend the scientific basis of orthodontics.

Current impact factor: 1.39

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2015
2013 / 2014 Impact Factor 1.39
2012 Impact Factor 1.078
2011 Impact Factor 0.893
2010 Impact Factor 0.932
2009 Impact Factor 0.975
2008 Impact Factor 1.015
2007 Impact Factor 1.022
2006 Impact Factor 0.621
2005 Impact Factor 0.651
2004 Impact Factor 0.788
2003 Impact Factor 0.656
2002 Impact Factor 0.72
2001 Impact Factor 0.591
2000 Impact Factor 0.593
1999 Impact Factor 0.607
1998 Impact Factor 0.386
1997 Impact Factor 0.4
1996 Impact Factor 0.563

Impact factor over time

Impact factor
Year

Additional details

5-year impact 1.46
Cited half-life 0.00
Immediacy index 0.20
Eigenfactor 0.01
Article influence 0.55
Website The European Journal of Orthodontics website
Other titles European journal of orthodontics (Online)
ISSN 0141-5387
OCLC 39926732
Material type Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details

Oxford University Press (OUP)

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author cannot archive a post-print version
  • Restrictions
    • 12 months embargo
  • Conditions
    • Pre-print can only be posted prior to acceptance
    • Pre-print must be accompanied by set statement (see link)
    • Pre-print must not be replaced with post-print, instead a link to published version with amended set statement should be made
    • Pre-print on author's personal website, employer website, free public server or pre-prints in subject area
    • Post-print in Institutional repositories or Central repositories
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • Published source must be acknowledged
    • Must link to publisher version
    • Set phrase to accompany archived copy (see policy)
    • Eligible authors may deposit in OpenDepot
    • The publisher will deposit in PubMed Central on behalf of NIH authors
    • Publisher last contacted on 19/02/2015
    • This policy is an exception to the default policies of 'Oxford University Press (OUP)'
  • Classification
    ​ yellow

Publications in this journal

  • The European Journal of Orthodontics 06/2015; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cjv036
  • The European Journal of Orthodontics 05/2015; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cjv031
  • The European Journal of Orthodontics 04/2015; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cjv020
  • The European Journal of Orthodontics 04/2015; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cjv018
  • The European Journal of Orthodontics 03/2015; 37(2):231-231. DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju096
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A new flash-free adhesive promises to eliminate the need to clean up excess adhesive upon orthodontic bracket bonding. This study evaluated this new adhesive with regard to microleakage at the enamel-bracket interface, amount of adhesive remaining on the tooth after bracket debonding, time required for adhesive remnant cleanup, and clinical practitioners' preference in comparison to a conventional adhesive. A total of 184 bovine incisors were bonded with ceramic brackets using either the flash-free adhesive (APC Flash-Free Adhesive Coated Appliance System, 3M Unitek [3M], Monrovia, California, USA) or a conventional adhesive (APCII Adhesive Coated Appliance System, 3M). Twenty-four of the teeth were scanned using microcomputed tomography to quantify microleakage into the adhesive layer. Twenty orthodontists debonded the brackets, removed the remaining adhesive, and then completed a survey regarding their preference for one of the two adhesives. The adhesive remnant was quantified and the time required for its removal recorded. Differences between the adhesives were tested for statistical significance. For both adhesives, the microleakage was minimal with no significant differences between the two adhesives. The adhesive remnant was significantly larger for the flash-free adhesive, whereas there was no significant difference in adhesive cleanup time. Fourteen out of the 20 orthodontists preferred the flash-free adhesive over the conventional adhesive. In vitro testing cannot replicate the actual clinical situation during in vivo debonding. With regard to bond quality and adhesive remnant cleanup, the new flash-free adhesive performs just as well as the conventional adhesive, and, of the two products, is the one preferred by most orthodontists. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 12/2014; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju080
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Summary OBJECTIVE : To test the null hypothesis that neither the flexural properties of orthodontic adhesive resins nor the enamel pre-treatment methods would affect metal bracket debonding behaviours, including enamel fracture. A dimethacrylate-based resin (Transbond XT, TX) and two methyl methacrylate (MMA)-based resins (Super-Bond C&B, SB; an experimental light-cured resin, EXP) were tested. Flexural strength and flexural modulus for each resin were measured by a three-point-bending test. Metal brackets were bonded to human enamel pretreated with total-etch (TE) or self-etch adhesive using one of the three resins (a total of six groups, n = 15). After 24 hours of storage in water at 37°C, a shear bond strength (SBS) test was performed using the wire loop method. After debonding, remaining resin on the enamel surfaces and occurrence of enamel fracture were assessed. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. The two MMA resins exhibited substantially lower flexural strength and modulus values than the TX resin. The mean SBS values of all groups (10.15-11.09MPa) were statistically equivalent to one another (P > 0.05), except for the TE-TX group (13.51MPa, P < 0.05). The two EXP groups showed less resin remnant. Only in the two TX groups were enamel fractures observed (three cases for each group). The results were drawn only from ex vivo experiments. The hypothesis is rejected. This study suggests that a more flexible MMA resin is favourable for avoiding enamel fracture during metal bracket debonding. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 12/2014; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju086
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Summary INTRODUCTION : Juvenile idiopathic arthritis affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) can cause severe disturbances of the mandibular development. Methotrexate (MTX) is often administered as a common used remission-inducing agent to treat this disease. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of low dose MTX on the mandibular growth in arthritic rabbits. Eighteen 10-week-old female New Zealand white rabbits were randomly assigned to three groups with six animals in each group. After being sensitized to ovalbumin (OA), the first and the second group received intra-articular injections with OA. The first group remained untreated, the second was treated by weekly injections of MTX. Cephalograms were taken from each animal at 10, 13, 16, 19, and 22 weeks of age and six mandibular distances measured. All distances showed an increase between 10 and 20 per cent, whereas growth was more accentuated in the sagittal dimension. Significant differences in the overall growth could be observed between the arthritic and the control animals and less accentuated between the arthritic and the MTX animals. In contrast, existing differences between the groups were not significant during the intervals, but time had the greatest influence on mandibular growth. MTX seems to have a positive impact on growth in rabbits suffering from experimental arthritis of the TMJ. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 12/2014; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju070
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Summary OBJECTIVES : This study investigated standards of ethical advertising; design and content; and information quality associated with UK dental practice websites offering orthodontic treatment. The World Wide Web was searched from a UK-based computer using the Google search engine combined with the term 'orthodontic braces'. The first 100 UK-based dental practice websites were pooled and saved following duplicate removal. Websites were evaluated for compliance with current General Dental Council ethical advertising guidelines; accessibility, usability, and reliability using the LIDA instrument (a validated outcome tool for healthcare website design and content evaluation); and quality of information using the DISCERN toolkit (a validated method of quality assessment for online written patient information). Nine per cent of websites demonstrated full compliance with current guidelines on ethical advertising. Mean total LIDA score was 110/144 (76%) [range: 51-135; 35-94%]. Eleven websites reached a gold standard of 90% or more for total LIDA score. Mean total DISCERN score was 48/75 (64%) [range: 19-73; 25-97%]. Five websites achieved a total DISCERN score above 90%. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients demonstrated no significant correlations between LIDA (0.1669; P = 0.4252, confidence interval [CI]: -0.2560 to 0.5362) or DISCERN (0.3572; P = 0.0796, CI: -0.0565 to 0.663) score and ranking amongst the 25 highest ranked websites. Most UK websites offering orthodontic services are not fully compliant with national guidelines relating to ethical advertising. Validated measures of website design (LIDA) and information quality (DISCERN) showed wide variation amongst sites. No correlation existed between ranking amongst the highest 25 sites and either of these measures. This investigation was limited to a subsample of UK-only websites; and whilst not representative of European-wide sites, it does suggest that in the UK at least website quality can be improved. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 12/2014; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju078
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Summary Fine orthodontic treatment results are fine. Fine stable results are finer. But when is stability achieved? Many studies show that the decline from optimal alignment and occlusion is most rapid immediately after appliance removal and slows down after some three to five years. For stabilization, we need some form of retention. Many retention regiments have been proposed sometimes with almost missionary fervour. The following commentary is a rather personal, but yet objective evaluation to highlight the quality evidence that the article by Edman, Petrén, Bondemark, and Lilja-Karlander presents which helps us clinicians to make informed decisions about orthodontic retention technique. It also underscores why the article is a masterpiece. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 12/2014; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju069
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Summary OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of self-ligating bracket (SLB) type and vibration on frictional force and stick-slip phenomenon (SSP) in diverse tooth displacement conditions when a levelling/alignment wire was drawn. A total of 16 groups were tested (n = 10/group): Two types of SLBs [active SLB (ASLB, In-Ovation R) and passive SLB (PSLB, Damon Q)]; vibration (30 Hz and 0.25 N) and non-vibration conditions; and 4 types of displacement [2mm lingual displacement of the maxillary right lateral incisor (LD), 2mm gingival displacement of the maxillary right canine (GD), combination of LD and GD (LGD), and control]. After applying artificial saliva to the typodont system, 0.018 copper nickel-titanium archwire was drawn by Instron with a speed of 0.5mm/min for 5 minutes at 36.5°C. After static/kinetic frictional forces (SFF/KFF), and frequency/amplitude of SSP were measured, statistical analysis was performed. ASLB exhibited higher SFF, KFF, and SSP amplitude (all P < 0.001) and lower SSF frequency (all P < 0.05) than PSLB in all displacement groups. Vibration decreased SFF, KFF, and SSP amplitude and increased SSP frequency in control and all displacement groups (all P < 0.001). ASLB exhibited lower SSP frequency than PSLB only under non-vibration condition (P < 0.05 in LD and GD, P < 0.01 in LGD). However, regardless of vibration conditions, ASLB demonstrated higher SSP amplitude than PSLB in all displacement groups (all P < 0.001 under non-vibration; all P < 0.01 under vibration). Even in tooth displacement conditions, vibration significantly reduced SFF, KFF, SSP amplitude, and increased SPP frequency in both PSLB and ASLB. However, in vivo studies would be needed to confirm the clinical significance. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 12/2014; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju060
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Summary OBJECTIVE : Comparison of three different retention strategies 5 years or more postretention. Randomized, prospective, single-centre controlled trial. Forty-nine patients (33 girls and 16 boys) were randomly assigned to one of three retention methods during 2 years by picking a ballot shortly before start of retention treatment. Inclusion criteria were no previous orthodontics, permanent dentition, normal skeletal sagittal, vertical, and transversal relationships, Class I dental relationship, space deficiencies, treatment plan with extractions of four premolars followed by fixed straight-wire appliance. Maxillary and mandibular Little's irregularity index (LII), intercanine and intermolar width, arch length, and overbite/overjet were recorded in a blinded manner, altogether 10 measurements on each patient. Significant differences in means within groups assessed by t-test and between groups by one-way analysis of variance. Retention methods: removable vacuum-formed retainer (VFR) covering the palate and the maxillary anterior teeth from canine-to-canine and bonded canine-to-canine retainer in the lower arch (group V-CTC); maxillary VFR combined with stripping of the lower anterior teeth (group V-S); and prefabricated positioner (group P). Maxillary mean LII ranged from 1.8 to 2.6mm, mean intercanine width 33.6-35.3mm with a significant difference between groups V-S and P, mean intermolar width 46.8-47.4mm and mean arch length 21.8-22.8mm. Mandibular mean LII ranged from 2.0 to 3.4mm with a significant difference between groups V-S and P, mean intercanine width from 25.4 to 26.6mm, mean intermolar width from 40.8 to 40.9mm and mean arch length from 16.9 to 17.3mm. Mean overbite ranged from 1.8 to 2.7mm and mean overjet from 3.7 to 4.1mm. A single centre study could be less generalizable. The three retention methods disclosed equally favourable clinical results. This trial was not registered. The protocol was not published before trial commencement. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 12/2014; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju063