↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
52 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
193 Mendeley
Title
Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2020
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003067.pub5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wafa Kashbour, Puneet Gupta, Helen V Worthington, Dwayne Boyers

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 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 193 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Canada 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 189 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 15%
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Student > Postgraduate 15 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 8%
Researcher 14 7%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 63 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 92 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 4%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 64 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 15 September 2021.
All research outputs
#542,429
of 18,891,791 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,220
of 11,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,853
of 389,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#17
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,891,791 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,887 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 389,574 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 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 67% of its contemporaries.