↓ Skip to main content

Drilling Deeper into Toothbrushing Skills: is Proactive Interference an Under-Recognized Factor in Oral Hygiene Behavior Change?

Overview of attention for article published in Current Oral Health Reports, July 2015
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 (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Drilling Deeper into Toothbrushing Skills: is Proactive Interference an Under-Recognized Factor in Oral Hygiene Behavior Change?
Published in
Current Oral Health Reports, July 2015
DOI 10.1007/s40496-015-0053-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rooban Thavarajah, Madan Kumar, Anusa Arunachalam Mohandoss, Lance T. Vernon

Abstract

Proper tooth brushing is a seemingly simple motor activity that can promote oral health. Applying health theories, such as the Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills (IMB) model, Motivational Interviewing (MI) and Integrated Health Coaching (IHC), may help optimize tooth brushing technique in those with suboptimal skills. Some motor activities, including tooth brushing, may over time become rote and unconscious actions, such that an existing habit can inhibit new learning, i.e., exert proactive interference on learning the new skill. Proactive interference may impede the acquisition of new tooth brushing skills; thus, in this report, we: (1) Review how the habit of tooth brushing is formed; (2) Postulate how proactive interference could impede the establishment of proper tooth brushing retraining; (3) Discuss the merits of this hypothesis; and (4) Provide guidance for future work in this topic within the context of an approach to behavior change that integrates IMB, MI and IHC methodology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Other 6 26%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 77. 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 17 September 2016.
All research outputs
#464,727
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from Current Oral Health Reports
#1
of 78 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,736
of 263,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Oral Health Reports
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 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 78 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 263,718 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them