BACKGROUND: Despite the longstanding contribution of Gerodontology to research on oral health and aging, its recent thematic development and patterns of scientific collaboration remain insufficiently characterized. This scientometric study analysed scientific production published in Gerodontology between 2007 and 2025 to characterize thematic trends, production and citation patterns, leading contributors, and collaboration networks. METHODS: Data were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS-CC) and Scopus, including articles and review articles. Bibliometric indicators addressed productivity, citation metrics, thematic mapping, thematic evolution, keyword co-occurrence, and collaboration networks. RESULTS: A total of 1148 publications were identified, with an annual growth rate of 3.2%, averaging 60.4 ± 41.7 publications and 1118.1 ± 921.8 citations per year. The mean number of co-authors per document was 5.0. Japan and Brazil emerged as leading contributors, with strong collaboration networks among authors and institutions. The most productive institutions included the University of São Paulo, São Paulo State University, and Niigata University. Thematic analysis revealed an evolution from early emphasis on prosthetic rehabilitation, complete dentures, and denture materials toward integrative and person-centered approaches. Recent central themes include frailty, nutrition, dementia, oral function, nursing homes, caregivers, and oral health-related quality of life. Emerging topics such as ageism, social determinants of health, and dental education indicate conceptual maturation and interdisciplinary expansion. CONCLUSION: Overall, Gerodontology demonstrates sustained growth and increasing integration of clinical, functional, and social dimensions of oral health in older adults, consolidating its role as a key platform for advancing geriatric oral health research. Next steps include the consolidation of middle-income countries through expanded South-South collaborations and equitable global research agendas.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rissi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: