Analina Braga Apolinário

Bibliometric analyses have become essential for understanding scientific production and innovation dynamics; however, large-scale applications remain limited by challenges related to data extraction, preprocessing, citation network reconstruction, and reproducibility, particularly when using PubMed-indexed records. This study presents a fully automated and reproducible computational workflow for large-scale bibliometric analyses based on the Disruption Index (DI). The pipeline enables systematic retrieval of PubMed data, standardized metadata processing, construction of citation networks, and calculation of DI values within a fixed post-publication citation window. Implemented in Python, the workflow integrates automated querying, XML parsing, data consolidation, and network-based citation classification, allowing scalable and transparent analyses that are infeasible through manual approaches. In a demonstrative application focused on orthodontic literature, the pipeline processed more than 67,000 articles and reconstructed over 300,000 citation relationships, resulting in a final analytical sample of 3,234 articles with indexed references and citations. The automated framework ensures methodological transparency, facilitates replication, and substantially reduces the time and technical barriers associated with advanced bibliometric studies. By providing an open and extensible solution for calculating the Disruption Index at scale, this workflow supports robust assessments of scientific innovation and consolidation and can be readily adapted to other biomedical research domains indexed in PubMed.

Introduction: In Brazil, the population’s easy access to the judicial system exposes healthcare professionals, including orthodontists, to the risk of becoming involved in legal disputes for which they are often inadequately prepared. Objective: In this context, the aim of this study was to assess the legal vulnerability of professionals involved in orthodontic practice and to identify factors associated with professional practice. Material and Methods: This cross-sectional observational study was conducted using a previously validated questionnaire administered to 247 professionals engaged in orthodontic practice. Participants were classified into low, moderate, and high levels of legal vulnerability. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, including Pearson’s chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests. Results: The results indicated greater vulnerability among non-specialists, professionals with fewer years since graduation and shorter clinical experience, as well as among those who graduated from private institutions (p < 0.001). In addition, 72.8% of participants believed that patients’ economic status may influence the occurrence of legal claims, and 53.5% reported lacking legal guidance for drafting contracts in their professional practice. Conclusion: The findings suggest the presence of vulnerabilities related to legal knowledge and professional practices, particularly among less experienced professionals and non-specialists in Orthodontics.

Introduction: The use of clear aligners as an alternative to fixed orthodontic appliances has become popular due to the aesthetic demands of adult patients seeking orthodontic treatment. However, orthodontists’ lack of knowledge about the legal consequences of their activities, and the lack of solid scientific evidence raise concerns regarding civil liability in this type of treatment. Marketing campaigns of manufacturing companies often exaggerate promises of results, and ignore the lack of scientific evidence. Patients, as consumers, are protected by the Consumer Protection Code, whereas orthodontists are considered treatment providers. Therefore, they can be held liable for damage caused to patients, whether by subjective or objective fault. Objective: This article aims to identify the civil responsibilities of orthodontists and aligner manufacturing companies, by means of a literature review, providing basic legal guidance to help professionals protect themselves from possible lawsuits related to treatment with orthodontic aligners. Conclusions: The study highlights the importance of knowledge of legal notions in treatments with orthodontic aligners by orthodontists, who should legally safeguard themselves through individual written contracts, avoiding obligation of results. In addition, in cases of legal claims, it is possible that the manufacturing companies are jointly and severally liable for possible damages claimed by the patient.