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 |
Palatine Tonsilloliths: A Retrospective Study on 500 Digital Panoramic Radiographs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2418 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Georges Aoun, Ibrahim Nasseh, Hicham A Diab, Riad Bacho |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to investigate palatine tonsilloliths in the Lebanese population via digital panoramic radiographs. Digital panoramic radiographs of a sample of 500 Lebanese adult patients (281 females and 219 males) with an average age of 47.9 years were included in this study and assessed for tonsilloliths. The IBM® SPSS® (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) version 20.0 for Windows was used to carry out statistical analysis of the data collected. Tonsilloliths were found in 7.2% of cases (36 out of 500; belonging to 18 females and 18 males). Among these, 13 cases were on the right side, 12 on the left side and 11 were bilateral. Affected patients' age ranged from 24 to 84 years (mean of 61 years). There was no statically significant relation between tonsilloliths presence and gender, while a low positive correlation was observed between tonsilloliths and age (r = 0.193). Palatine tonsilloliths may be discovered fortuitously on panoramic radiographs utilized regularly in dental offices; their incidence increases with age. Panoramic radiographs may have a beneficial role in detecting palatine tonsilloliths sometimes connected to unpleasant symptoms such as non-specific chronic halitosis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 31% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 15% |
| Researcher | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 46% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 December 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice
#321
of 479 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#389,382
of 449,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice
#22
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 479 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 449,583 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.