| Title |
Direct composite resin fillings versus amalgam fillings for permanent posterior teeth
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd005620.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Helen V Worthington, Sara Khangura, Kelsey Seal, Monika Mierzwinski-Urban, Analia Veitz-Keenan, Philipp Sahrmann, Patrick Roger Schmidlin, Dell Davis, Zipporah Iheozor-Ejiofor, María Graciela Rasines Alcaraz |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 | 3 | 11% |
| Peru | 2 | 7% |
| Ireland | 2 | 7% |
| Malaysia | 2 | 7% |
| Italy | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| Japan | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 52% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 26% |
| Scientists | 6 | 22% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 276 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 276 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 49 | 18% |
| Unknown | 143 | 52% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 79 | 29% |
| Unspecified | 9 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Psychology | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 23 | 8% |
| Unknown | 148 | 54% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 21 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,186,928
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,477
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,303
of 437,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#44
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 437,257 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.