| Title |
Omega-3 fatty acids as an adjunct for periodontal therapy—a review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Oral Investigations, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00784-016-1750-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
B. Chee, B. Park, T. Fitzsimmons, A. M. Coates, P. M. Bartold |
| Abstract |
The aim of this article is to present an overview of omega-3 fatty acids, their anti-inflammatory properties and potential use as an adjunct for periodontal therapy. A general literature search was conducted to provide an overview of omega-3 fatty acids, their metabolism and anti-inflammatory properties. A more specific literature search of PubMed and EMBASE was conducted to identify articles dealing studies investigating the effects of omega-3 fatty acids in the treatment of periodontitis in animals and humans and included cross-sectional, longitudinal and intervention designs. To date, there is good emerging evidence that dietary supplementation with fish oil may be of some benefit and this is enhanced if combined with aspirin. All clinical intervention studies to date have been on small sample sizes, and this indicates there is need for larger and more robust clinical trials to verify these initial findings. Dietary supplementation with fish oil could be a cost-effective adjunctive therapy to the management of periodontal disease. The host modulatory properties of omega-3 fatty acids warrant further assessment of their use as an adjunct in the management of periodontitis. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 17% |
| Spain | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 82 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 18% |
| Unknown | 28 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 30 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 December 2017.
All research outputs
#8,054,448
of 25,784,004 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Oral Investigations
#343
of 1,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,378
of 312,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Oral Investigations
#12
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,784,004 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,599 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 312,870 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.