↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent or adult posterior teeth

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
36 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
157 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
426 Mendeley
Title
Direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent or adult posterior teeth
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005620.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

M Graciela Rasines Alcaraz, Analia Veitz-Keenan, Philipp Sahrmann, Patrick Roger Schmidlin, Dell Davis, Zipporah Iheozor-Ejiofor

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 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 426 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 421 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 76 18%
Student > Master 68 16%
Student > Postgraduate 34 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 8%
Researcher 29 7%
Other 77 18%
Unknown 108 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 228 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 3%
Psychology 8 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 1%
Other 39 9%
Unknown 126 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 62. 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 01 February 2022.
All research outputs
#538,630
of 21,685,809 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,096
of 12,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,496
of 206,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#23
of 201 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,685,809 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,101 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 206,672 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 201 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.