This study aimed to analyze the methodological and thematic profiles, as well as the publication outcomes, of undergraduate dental thesis projects developed within a Dentistry program. A retrospective documentary study with a descriptive and analytical quantitative approach was conducted based on an analysis of undergraduate dental thesis projects from the Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri (UFVJM). Data were collected from information available on the thesis projects, including all studies presented and approved between 2022 and 2025. Data extraction was performed manually by two examiners, with the information organized in prestructured spreadsheets. In cases of disagreement between the examiners, a third evaluator conducted an independent assessment. A total of 119 thesis projects were analyzed, with the highest concentration of defenses occurring in 2024 and 2025 (70.6%) and most projects being developed by a single student (51.3%). The most frequently addressed fields were Operative Dentistry (16.0%) and Stomatology (14.3%). Most advisors (89.9%) and examination board members (70.1%) held doctoral degrees, and 42.0% of the projects had co-advisors who were master's students. Descriptive studies predominated, particularly narrative reviews (29.4%) and case reports or case series (27.7%), whereas clinical trials and systematic reviews were less frequent (5.9% and 5.0%, respectively). The observed publication rate was 36.1%, with a mean time to publication of 5.7 ± 5.8 months. The findings of this study demonstrate that undergraduate dental thesis projects have a predominantly descriptive profile, with a higher frequency of methodologies associated with lower levels of scientific evidence. Furthermore, the results indicate that more robust study designs are associated with greater publication potential.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oliveira et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: