Tuesday, May 19, 2009

International Journal of Dental Hygiene


The first issue (February 2009) of this year's International Journal of Dental Hygiene is now available for free. Click on on the articles to read the full text:

Halitosis among racially diverse populations: an update

Attitudes of South African oral hygienists towards compulsory community service

Spanish dental hygienist attitudes to dental radiological protection: assessment of a 1-day pilot course

A survey on misunderstanding of dental scaling in Hong Kong

Evaluation of a 7-year school-based community dental hygiene programme in Portugal by high school teachers

Microbiological evaluation and antibiotic susceptibility of dental unit water systems in general dental practice

Legionella pneumophila contamination of a dental unit water line system in a dental teaching centre

Dental unit water: bacterial decontamination of old and new dental units by flushing water

A randomized controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of professional oral care by dental hygienists

False gingival enlargement as a diagnostic problem: a case report

Super bugs: super problems

The second issue of this year's journal (May 2008) is also published, and the Library can provide you with copies of any article. They include:

Growth factors in periodontal regeneration


Bisphosphonate-related jaw necrosis: A team approach management and prevention


Child abuse and dental neglect: the dental team's role in identification and prevention


Factors affecting oral health-related quality of life among pregnant women


Public awareness and social acceptability of dental therapists


Gingival recession: epidemiology and risk indicators in a university dental hospital in Turkey


Increase in detectable opportunistic bacteria in the oral cavity of orthodontic patients


Comparison of the effects of pilocarpine and cevimeline on salivary flow


The analysis of oral air using selected ion flow tube mass spectrometry in persons with and without a history of oral malodour


A study to evaluate the relationship between periodontitis, cardiovascular disease and serum lipid levels


A review of anticoagulation intensity and outcomes among patients prescribed oral anticoagulant therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Colour Atlas of Common Oral Diseases


We have just added to the collection a new edition of Colour Atlas of Common Oral Diseases, by Robert Langlais, Craig Miller and Jill Nield-Gehrig. This fourth edition has been thoroughly revised, updated, and expanded with over 650 high-quality color photographs and radiographic illustrations of oral disease to help you recognize and identify oral diseases. It presents clinical and radiographic features of common diseases found in the oral cavity according to location, color, surface change, and radiographic appearance.

You can find in the books section under the call number RC 815 .L35 2009

Monday, May 4, 2009

Frequently Asked Questions about Plagiarism

You've already heard the warnings about plagiarism. Obviously it's against the rules to buy essays or copy chunks from your friend's homework, and it's also plagiarism to borrow passages from books or articles or Web sites without identifying them. You know that the purpose of any paper is to show your own thinking, not create a patchwork of borrowed ideas. But you may still be wondering how you're supposed to give proper references to all the reading you've done and all the ideas you've encountered.

The point of documenting sources in academic papers is not just to avoid unpleasant visits to the Director's office, but to demonstrate that you know what is going on in your field of study. It's also a courtesy to your readers because it helps them consult the material you've found. That's especially important for Internet sources. So mentioning what others have said doesn't lessen the credit you get for your own thinking—in fact, it adds to your credibility.

That's not to say that questions about ownership of ideas are simple. For one thing, the different systems for typing up references are admittedly a nuisance. But the real challenge is establishing the relationship of your thinking to the reading you've done (yes, that includes the Internet). Here are some common questions and basic answers.

1. Can't I avoid problems just by listing every source in the bibliography?

No, you need to integrate your acknowledgements into what you're saying. Give the reference as soon as you've mentioned the idea you're using, not just at the end of the paragraph. It's often a good idea to name the authors ("X says" and "Y argues against X,") and then indicate your own stand ("A more inclusive perspective, however, . . . ").

2. If I put the ideas into my own words, do I still have to clog up my pages with all those names and numbers?

Sorry—yes, you do. In academic papers, you need to keep mentioning authors and pages and dates to show how your ideas are related to those of the experts. It's sensible to use your own words because that saves space and lets you connect ideas smoothly. But whether you quote a passage directly in quotation marks, paraphrase it closely in your own words, or just summarize it rapidly, you need to identify the source then and there. (That applies to Internet sources too: you still need author and date as well as title and URL.)


3. But I didn't know anything about the subject until I started this paper. Do I have to give an acknowledgement for every point I make?

You're safer to over-reference than to skimp. But you can cut down the clutter by recognizing that some ideas are "common knowledge" in the field—that is, taken for granted by people knowledgeable about the topic. Facts easily found in standard reference books are considered common knowledge: that brushing your teeth often helps your oral health, or that . You don't need to name a specific source for them, even if you learned them only when doing your research. In some disciplines, information covered in class lectures doesn't need acknowledgement. Some interpretive ideas may also be so well accepted that they don't need referencing: that Picasso is a distinguished modernist painter, for instance, or that smoking is harmful to health. Check with your instructor if you're in doubt whether a specific point is considered common knowledge in your field.


How can I tell what's my own idea and what has come from somebody else?

Careful record-keeping helps. Always write down the author, title and publication information (including the URL and other identifying information for web pages) so you can attach names and dates to specific ideas. Taking good notes is also essential. Don't paste passages from webpages into your draft: that's asking for trouble. As you read any text—online or on the page—summarize useful points in your own words. If you record a phrase or sentence you might want to quote, put quotation marks around it in your notes to remind yourself that you're copying the author's exact words. And make a deliberate effort as you read to notice connections among ideas, especially contrasts and disagreements, and also to jot down questions or thoughts of your own. If you find as you write that you're following one or two of your sources too closely, deliberately look back in your notes for other sources that take different views; then write about the differences and why they exist.

So what exactly do I have to document?

With experience reading academic prose, you'll soon get used to the ways writers in your field refer to their sources. Here are the main times you should give acknowledgements. (You'll notice many different formats in these examples. See the file on Standard Documentation Formats for advice on these systems.)

Quotations, paraphrases, or summaries: If you use the author's exact words, enclose them in quotation marks, or indent passages of more than four lines. But it's seldom worthwhile to use long quotations. In literary studies, quote a few words of the work you're analysing and comment on them. In other disciplines, quote only when the original words are especially memorable. In most cases, use your own words to paraphrase or summarize the idea you want to discuss, emphasizing the points relevant to your argument. But be sure to name sources even when you are not using the exact original words.

Specific facts used as evidence for your argument or interpretation: First consider whether the facts you're mentioning are "common knowledge" according to the definition in point 3 above; if so, you may not need to give a reference. But when you're relying on facts that might be disputed within your discipline—perhaps newly published data—establish that they're trustworthy by showing that you got them from an authoritative source.

Distinctive or authoritative ideas, whether you agree with them or not: The way you introduce a reference can indicate your attitude and lead into your own argument.