↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
173 Mendeley
Title
Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003814.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elliot Abt, Alan B Carr, Helen V Worthington

Abstract

Management of individuals presenting with partial loss of teeth is a common task for dentists. Outcomes important to the management of missing teeth in the partially absent dentition should be systematically summarized. This review recognizes both the challenges associated with such a summarization and the critical nature of the information for patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 172 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 24%
Student > Postgraduate 22 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 12%
Researcher 17 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Other 35 20%
Unknown 23 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 114 66%
Psychology 6 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Materials Science 4 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 10 6%
Unknown 31 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 20 November 2015.
All research outputs
#4,674,014
of 18,978,726 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,893
of 11,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,497
of 134,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#58
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,978,726 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,901 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. 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 134,123 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.