↓ Skip to main content

Retrospective magnetic resonance imaging study of risk factors associated with sideways disk displacement of the temporomandibular joint

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Oral Science, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
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.
Title
Retrospective magnetic resonance imaging study of risk factors associated with sideways disk displacement of the temporomandibular joint
Published in
Journal of Oral Science, January 2016
DOI 10.2334/josnusd.58.29
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kiyomi Kohinata, Kunihito Matsumoto, Toshihiro Suzuki, Mari Tsunoda, Yusuke Hayashi, Masao Araki, Koji Hashimoto, Kazuya Honda

Abstract

As part of our ongoing investigation of risk and predictive factors associated with temporomandibular disorders, we used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to identify risk factors for sideways disk displacement of the temporomandibular joint in 26 patients with MRI-confirmed unilateral pure sideways disk displacement (medial or lateral disk displacement) and normal positioning of the contralateral temporomandibular joint. Coronal morphologic harmonization between the condyle and fossa, angle between the axis of the ramus and condyle, and angle between the lateral pterygoid muscle (LPM) and condyle were evaluated. Only angle of the LPM related to the condyle was significantly correlated with mediolateral disk position; the angles of joints with medial, normal, and lateral disk positions were 70.2°, 66.7°, and 60.1°, respectively. These results suggest that a greater angle of the inferior head of the LPM to the axis of the condyle on axial MRI images may cause medial disk displacement, while a smaller angle may result in lateral disk displacement. (J Oral Sci 58, 29-34, 2016).

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 25%
Student > Master 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 44%
Neuroscience 2 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Materials Science 1 6%
Unknown 5 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 April 2016.
All research outputs
#19,762,064
of 24,286,850 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Oral Science
#161
of 337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#294,864
of 402,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Oral Science
#5
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,286,850 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 337 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 402,470 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.