| Title |
Poor Oral Health as a Chronic, Potentially Modifiable Dementia Risk Factor: Review of the Literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11910-013-0384-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James M. Noble, Nikolaos Scarmeas, Panos N. Papapanou |
| Abstract |
Poor oral health, including caries, tooth loss, and periodontitis, is ubiquitous worldwide, and is potentially treatable and preventable. Like adverse oral health conditions, Alzheimer disease and related disorders are also very common among aging populations. Established risk factors for Alzheimer disease include cerebrovascular disease and its vascular risk factors, many of which share associations with evidence of systemic inflammation also identified in periodontitis and other poor oral health states. In this review, we present epidemiologic evidence of links between poor oral health and both prevalent and incident cognitive impairment, and review plausible mechanisms linking these conditions, including evidence from compelling animal models. Considering that a large etiologic fraction of dementia remains unexplained, these studies argue for further multidisciplinary research between oral health conditions, including translational, epidemiologic, and possibly clinical treatment studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 2 | 29% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Latvia | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Scientists | 2 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Unknown | 182 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 24 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 11% |
| Researcher | 19 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 32 | 17% |
| Unknown | 52 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 73 | 40% |
| Psychology | 12 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 21 | 11% |
| Unknown | 53 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,198,580
of 24,529,782 outputs
Outputs from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#43
of 968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,394
of 204,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,529,782 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 204,316 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 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.