↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: augmentation procedures of the maxillary sinus

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
125 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley
Title
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: augmentation procedures of the maxillary sinus
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008397
Pubmed ID
Authors

Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Rees J, Karasoulos D, Felice P, Alissa R, Worthington HV, Coulthard P, Esposito, Marco, Grusovin, Maria Gabriella, Rees, Jonathan, Karasoulos, Dimitrios, Felice, Pietro, Alissa, Rami, Worthington, Helen V, Coulthard, Paul

Abstract

Insufficient bone volume is a common problem encountered in the rehabilitation of the edentulous posterior maxillae with implant-supported prostheses. Bone volume is limited by the presence of the maxillary sinus together with loss of alveolar bone height. Sinus lift procedures increase bone volume by augmenting the sinus cavity with autogenous bone and/or commercially available biomaterials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 149 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 16%
Student > Postgraduate 24 15%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Other 26 17%
Unknown 39 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 98 63%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Materials Science 2 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 <1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 <1%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 44 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2013.
All research outputs
#14,616,041
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,555
of 12,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,472
of 106,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#53
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 106,050 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.