| Title |
Enamel matrix derivative (Emdogain®) for periodontal tissue regeneration in intrabony defects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003875.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marco Esposito, Maria Gabriella Grusovin, Nikolaos Papanikolaou, Paul Coulthard, Helen V Worthington |
| Abstract |
Periodontitis is a chronic infective disease of the gums caused by bacteria present in dental plaque. This condition induces the breakdown of the tooth supporting apparatus until teeth are lost. Surgery may be indicated to arrest disease progression and regenerate lost tissues. Several surgical techniques have been developed to regenerate periodontal tissues including guided tissue regeneration (GTR), bone grafting (BG) and the use of enamel matrix derivative (EMD). EMD is an extract of enamel matrix and contains amelogenins of various molecular weights. Amelogenins are involved in the formation of enamel and periodontal attachment formation during tooth development. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 | 4 | 27% |
| Canada | 2 | 13% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 7% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 286 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 279 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 38 | 13% |
| Researcher | 31 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 26 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 7% |
| Other | 54 | 19% |
| Unknown | 95 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 150 | 52% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 21 | 7% |
| Unknown | 96 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 30 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,766,840
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,760
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,291
of 106,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 106,969 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 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.