↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: horizontal and vertical bone augmentation techniques for dental implant treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
210 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
498 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: horizontal and vertical bone augmentation techniques for dental implant treatment
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2009
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003607.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marco Esposito, Maria Gabriella Grusovin, Pietro Felice, Georgios Karatzopoulos, Helen V Worthington, Paul Coulthard

Abstract

Dental implants require sufficient bone to be adequately stabilised. For some patients implant treatment would not be an option without horizontal or vertical bone augmentation. A variety of materials and surgical techniques are available for bone augmentation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 498 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 489 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 121 24%
Student > Postgraduate 66 13%
Researcher 51 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 10%
Student > Bachelor 36 7%
Other 81 16%
Unknown 93 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 304 61%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 3%
Psychology 12 2%
Materials Science 7 1%
Other 30 6%
Unknown 110 22%

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 04 July 2014.
All research outputs
#7,477,393
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,390
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,594
of 189,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#143
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 189,412 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.