| Title |
Fluoride supplementation (with tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) in pregnant women for preventing dental caries in the primary teeth of their children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd011850.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rena Takahashi, Erika Ota, Keika Hoshi, Toru Naito, Yoshihiro Toyoshima, Hidemichi Yuasa, Rintaro Mori, Eishu Nango |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 89 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 11 | 12% |
| United States | 10 | 11% |
| Spain | 4 | 4% |
| Canada | 4 | 4% |
| Saudi Arabia | 4 | 4% |
| Thailand | 3 | 3% |
| Chile | 3 | 3% |
| Peru | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 37 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 60 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 20 | 22% |
| Scientists | 7 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 402 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 402 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 45 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 36 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 31 | 8% |
| Researcher | 24 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 5% |
| Other | 77 | 19% |
| Unknown | 167 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 101 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 37 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 31 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 41 | 10% |
| Unknown | 175 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 85. 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 02 March 2024.
All research outputs
#511,852
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#898
of 13,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,851
of 342,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#20
of 277 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,171 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 342,315 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 277 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.