You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effect of Local vs. Systemic Bisphosphonate Delivery on Dental Implant Fixation in a Model of Osteonecrosis of the Jaw
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1177/0022034512472335 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. Abtahi, F. Agholme, O. Sandberg, P. Aspenberg |
| Abstract |
Locally applied bisphosphonates may improve the fixation of metal implants in bone. However, systemic bisphosphonate treatment is associated with a risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). We hypothesized that local delivery of bisphosphonate from the implant surface improves the fixation of dental implants without complications in a setting where systemic treatment induces ONJ. Forty rats were randomly allocated to 4 groups of 10. All groups received a titanium implant inserted in an extraction socket. Group I received the implants only. Group II received dexamethasone (0.5 mg/kg). Group III received dexamethasone as above plus alendronate (200 µg/kg). Group IV received zoledronate-coated implants and dexamethasone as above. The animals were sacrificed 2 weeks after tooth extraction. All 10 animals with systemic alendronate treatment developed large ONJ-like changes, while all with local treatment were completely healed. Implant removal torque was higher for the bisphosphonate-coated implants compared with the other groups (p < 0.03 for each comparison). Micro-computed tomography of the maxilla showed more bone loss in the systemic alendronate group compared with groups receiving local treatment (p = 0.001). Local bisphosphonate treatment appears to improve implant fixation in a setting where systemic treatment caused ONJ. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 States | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 112 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 12% |
| Researcher | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 9% |
| Other | 25 | 22% |
| Unknown | 24 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 63 | 55% |
| Engineering | 5 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 3% |
| Materials Science | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Unknown | 31 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 01 August 2023.
All research outputs
#4,567,939
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine
#710
of 3,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,555
of 288,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine
#4
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,870 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 288,773 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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.