| Title |
Dental auxiliaries for dental care traditionally provided by dentists
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd010076.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tom A Dyer, Paul Brocklehurst, Anne‐Marie Glenny, Linda Davies, Martin Tickle, Ansy Issac, Peter G Robinson |
| Abstract |
Poor or inequitable access to oral health care is commonly reported in high-, middle- and low-income countries. Although the severity of these problems varies, a lack of supply of dentists and their uneven distribution are important factors. Delegating care to dental auxiliaries could ease this problem, extend services to where they are unavailable and liberate time for dentists to do more complex work. Before such an approach can be advocated, it is important to know the relative effectiveness of dental auxiliaries and dentists. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 307 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 306 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 50 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 9% |
| Researcher | 26 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 5% |
| Other | 53 | 17% |
| Unknown | 103 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 112 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 7% |
| Psychology | 12 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 33 | 11% |
| Unknown | 114 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 26 May 2018.
All research outputs
#4,388,609
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,676
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,536
of 247,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#121
of 216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 247,003 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 216 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.