↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Resorbable versus titanium plates for orthognathic surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Resorbable versus titanium plates for orthognathic surgery
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006204.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fedorowicz Z, Nasser M, Newton JT, Oliver RJ, Fedorowicz, Zbys, Nasser, Mona, Newton, Tim, Oliver, Richard

Abstract

Recognition of some of the limitations of titanium plates and screws used for the fixation of bones has led to the development of plates manufactured from bioresorbable materials. Whilst resorbable plates appear to offer clinical advantages over metal plates in orthognathic surgery, concerns remain about the stability of fixation and the length of time required for their degradation and the possibility of foreign body reactions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Nigeria 1 1%
Unknown 66 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 37%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 3 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 62%
Psychology 5 7%
Engineering 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 8 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 20 August 2015.
All research outputs
#1,566,151
of 14,686,855 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,185
of 11,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,192
of 151,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#36
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,686,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,037 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
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 151,143 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.