| Title |
Enamel etching for bonding fixed orthodontic braces
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd005516.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haikun Hu, Chunjie Li, Fan Li, Jianwei Chen, Jianfeng Sun, Shujuan Zou, Andrew Sandham, Qiang Xu, Philip Riley, Qingsong Ye |
| Abstract |
Acid etching of tooth surfaces to promote the bonding of orthodontic attachments to the enamel has been a routine procedure in orthodontic treatment since the 1960s. Various types of orthodontic etchants and etching techniques have been introduced in the past five decades. Although a large amount of information on this topic has been published, there is a significant lack of consensus regarding the clinical effects of different dental etchants and etching techniques. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 25% |
| Spain | 4 | 17% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 4% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 21% |
| Scientists | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 252 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 251 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 41 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 10% |
| Researcher | 21 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 20 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 44 | 17% |
| Unknown | 86 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 111 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Psychology | 6 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 22 | 9% |
| Unknown | 92 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 27 April 2022.
All research outputs
#1,465,754
of 25,972,223 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,989
of 13,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,462
of 320,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#58
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,972,223 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,170 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 320,201 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.