↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Antibacterial agents in composite restorations for the prevention of dental caries

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
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 (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
18 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 Mendeley
Title
Antibacterial agents in composite restorations for the prevention of dental caries
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007819.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tatiana Pereira‐Cenci, Maximiliano S Cenci, Zbys Fedorowicz, Marina Azevedo

Abstract

Dental caries is a multifactorial disease in which the fermentation of food sugars by bacteria from the biofilm (dental plaque) leads to localised demineralisation of tooth surfaces, which may ultimately result in cavity formation. Resin composites are widely used in dentistry to restore teeth. These restorations can fail for a number of reasons, such as secondary caries, and restorative material fracture and other minor reasons. From these, secondary caries, which are caries lesions developed adjacent to restorations, is the main cause for restorations replacement. The presence of antibacterials in both the filling material and the bonding systems would theoretically be able to affect the initiation and progression of caries adjacent to restorations. This is an update of the Cochrane review published in 2009.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 194 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 13%
Student > Bachelor 22 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 9%
Student > Postgraduate 13 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 38 20%
Unknown 66 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 89 46%
Engineering 4 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Materials Science 4 2%
Unspecified 4 2%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 70 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 30 August 2017.
All research outputs
#1,537,502
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,286
of 11,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,076
of 307,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#67
of 209 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 307,722 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 209 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 67% of its contemporaries.