| Title |
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of peri‐implantitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004970.pub5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marco Esposito, Maria Gabriella Grusovin, Helen V Worthington |
| Abstract |
One of the key factors for the long-term success of oral implants is the maintenance of healthy tissues around them. Bacterial plaque accumulation induces inflammatory changes in the soft tissues surrounding oral implants and it may lead to their progressive destruction (peri-implantitis) and ultimately to implant failure. Different treatment strategies for peri-implantitis have been suggested, however it is unclear which are the most effective. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 4 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 19% |
| Canada | 2 | 13% |
| Chile | 1 | 6% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 88% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 387 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 379 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 70 | 18% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 46 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 41 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 8% |
| Researcher | 31 | 8% |
| Other | 70 | 18% |
| Unknown | 97 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 226 | 58% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 2% |
| Psychology | 6 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 1% |
| Other | 24 | 6% |
| Unknown | 110 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 13 September 2021.
All research outputs
#1,342,720
of 25,543,275 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,865
of 13,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,682
of 252,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#33
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,543,275 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,150 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 252,131 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 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.