The study aimed at monitoring the psychological well-being of dental students over the first semester of the academic year, in order to acknowledge if psychological well-being during the semester evaluation period is predicted by well-being during teaching period. Methodology: Second year dental students from the Faculty of Dental Medicine, "Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania were evaluated across the first academic semester, on three consecutive times during the teaching period, and one time during the semester evaluation evaluation period. Well-being was evaluated in terms of subjective positive psychological well-being, assessed by WHO-Five Well-being Index (WHO-5), and as the severity of depression symptoms, assessed by Major Depression Inventory (MDI). Results: As expected, the students' psychological well-being was highest at the beginning of the semester and lowest during the semester evaluation period. By regression analysis it was observed that wellbeing during the semester evaluation period is poorly predicted by their well-being at the beginning of the semester, and it is better predicted when assessed in similar periods with regard to the quality of stressors (i.e., written examinations) or at the end of the teaching period. Also, their psychological wellbeing in terms of severity of depression symptoms seems to be a more predictable state than subjective positive psychological well-being. Conclusion: Early identification of students at high risk to exhibit lowering levels of psychological wellbeing should be implemented in order to plan the necessary interventions to help students cope with the examination distress and prevent its unwanted consequences.

Editorials Dear readers, As editor of the Stomatology Edu Journal, I attended the webinars organized by Clarivate Analytics. This is where I found out a series of extremely useful information in my editorial task. This is how I learned about Publons, a site which is part of Clarivate Analytics, and its importance in an editor' s activity. Therefore, to improve the peerreview process and to make the activity of the reviewers more visible, we have registered the Stomatology Edu Journal in Publons. https://publons.com/journal/70355/stomatology-edu-journal Opening access to reviews and assigning publication credits to the best reviews is one of the latest achievements of the current digitization. The proliferation of scientific journals poses a lot of problems to editors in recruiting reviewers. An estimated 63 million hours were devoted to peer-review in 2015, out of which 18.9 million hours were provided by the top 5% contributing reviewers [1]. From now on, the Stomatology Edu Journal belongs to the family of over 250 dental journals included in the constellation of over 2,400 Publons partner journals. We recommend that you stop being a reluctant reviewer and join the more than 490,000 Publons experts to monitor, review and submit your review contributions to our field. From now on, any review can be automatically added to your profile by submitting a "Thank you for reviewing" email to reviews@publons.com. Publons will privately check your activity and get credible evidence for your CV. From the next issue of the Stomatology Edu Journal, we recommend that you do not allow any of your reviews unregistered. If you are not registered as a reviewer in Publons yet, after reading this Editorial, you can create a free reviewer profile as early as today by signing up for https://publons.com/account/signup/. By registering with Publons you will meet the world's best reviewers in our field and you will get quantitative data on your research work in case global research is cited, reused, read and so on. Publons is integrated with all peer-review systems to provide peer-reviewers with instant recognition of their contributions in line with the journal review policies. Publons is integrated into the reviewer workflow so academics can monitor and verify every review and editorial contribution on the fly and in complete compliance with the journal review policies. By 2013 Publons has archived and processed 66,224 reviews from 3,675 journals. Reviewers were granted credits for the posted items and were able to export their records to their IDs for editorial and academic promotion and research funding applications [2]. In recognition of an "outstanding contribution" on "time, quality and frequency", Elsevier awarded certificates of excellence to 25 of the best reviewers for each title in 35 journals [3].

No abstract

Book Review

BOOK REVIEW