1. Original Research Articles  

 These articles present in-depth reports of original scientific studies and experimental research conducted in the field of dentistry. They provide detailed methodologies, results, and discussions that contribute to advancing knowledge and innovation in various aspects of dental science, including clinical, laboratory, and interdisciplinary investigations.

2. Review Articles 

   This category encompasses comprehensive reviews that offer a deep and critical analysis of specific topics within dentistry. Authors synthesize existing research to highlight advancements, knowledge gaps, and future directions. These may include:  

a. Narrative Reviews: 

Narrative reviews are structured yet flexible pieces of scholarly writing that aim to provide a concise yet comprehensive overview of a specific topic. Unlike systematic reviews that adhere to strict methodologies, narrative reviews adopt a more interpretative and descriptive approach, allowing authors to explore a subject in depth while presenting information in a cohesive and readable manner.  These reviews are ideal for summarizing existing knowledge on a given topic, highlighting significant findings, discussing trends, and identifying gaps in research. Authors often rely on a combination of previously published studies, expert opinions, and critical analysis to provide a well-rounded perspective on the subject.  Typically, narrative reviews are written by experts in the field who have a deep understanding of the subject matter, enabling them to present nuanced perspectives. The content may span various aspects of the topic, including theoretical frameworks, methodological approaches, and practical applications, while maintaining an integrative and analytical tone. Through their narrative style, these reviews excel in bridging the gap between complex research findings and their practical implications, inspiring further inquiry and innovation. Narrative reviews are an invaluable resource for both seasoned professionals and students seeking to familiarize themselves with the foundational aspects of a specific domain.  

b. Scoping Reviews: 

Scoping reviews are a type of scholarly review aimed at mapping and providing a broad examination of the existing research activity within a particular field or topic. Unlike systematic reviews that focus on answering narrowly defined research questions, scoping reviews are more exploratory in nature, making them especially useful for investigating under-researched areas or emerging subjects. Their primary purpose is to identify the range, extent, and characteristics of available research, rather than to synthesize or critically appraise the evidence. A typical scoping review follows a structured yet flexible methodology. Scoping reviews do not typically conduct detailed critical appraisals of study quality or statistical meta-analyses. Scoping reviews are particularly valuable for exploring multidisciplinary topics, emerging fields, or complex areas where research evidence is fragmented. They are frequently used to guide the development of new hypotheses, identify priorities for systematic reviews, or establish foundational knowledge for academic disciplines.  

c. Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses  

Systematic reviews are structured and methodical evaluations of all available evidence on a clearly defined research question. They follow standardized protocols, beginning with a precise research question, extensive literature search, and rigorous selection criteria. Studies are critically appraised for quality and synthesized, often using meta-analysis for quantitative data. Transparent and reproducible, systematic reviews provide a comprehensive summary of evidence to guide research, policy, and practice, making them a cornerstone of evidence-based decision-making. Meta-Analyses add statistical analyses combining results from multiple studies.  
  
d. Umbrella Reviews:

Umbrella reviews are a type of research synthesis that consolidates and summarizes evidence from multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses on a broad topic. Their purpose is to provide a comprehensive overview by evaluating findings across various systematic reviews, identifying overarching trends, and offering a higher-level perspective on the evidence landscape. These reviews are particularly useful for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers seeking a concise yet thorough understanding of complex or multidisciplinary fields.

3. Case Reports/Case Series  

Case Reports focus on the detailed documentation of unique, rare, or novel occurrences within clinical practice. These may include rare diseases, uncommon presentations of common conditions, unexpected complications, or innovative treatment approaches. Their emphasis lies in showcasing originality, as they often serve to highlight aspects of a case that deviate from conventional expectations or challenge existing knowledge. By meticulously describing the patient's history, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes, case reports contribute valuable insights to medical literature, inspiring further research and discussion.  Case Series extend the concept of case reports by presenting a collection of cases that share similar features or themes, often focusing on conditions or situations of notable rarity. While not as statistically rigorous as larger studies, case series are instrumental in identifying emerging patterns or trends. For example, they may report on the collective experiences of treating a rare disease in multiple patients or document responses to a novel intervention.  

4. Commentaries   

Commentaries are a form of original scientific publication that provide expert opinions, critical perspectives, or thought-provoking insights on specific topics, recent developments, or emerging issues in a field. Unlike research articles, they do not present new experimental data but instead offer scholarly analyses and interpretations that contribute to ongoing debates or stimulate further investigation. These publications are often authored by subject matter experts and focus on providing state-of-the-art discussions, highlighting the significance of findings, or addressing gaps in current understanding. By fostering intellectual dialogue, commentaries serve as a platform for advancing ideas and influencing future directions in research and practice.

5. Letters to the Editor  

   Letters to the editor allow for direct communication with the journal's readership and editorial team. These brief submissions may discuss or critique previously published articles, provide updates on ongoing research, or express personal viewpoints on matters of significance to the dental community. They serve as a forum for scholarly exchange and engagement within the journal's academic community.