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 |
Predictors for the development of temporomandibular disorders in scuba divers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1111/joor.12178 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F. Lobbezoo, A. J. van Wijk, M. C. Klingler, E. Ruiz Vicente, C. J. van Dijk, M. A. J. Eijkman |
| Abstract |
The aim was to determine predictors for the development of complaints of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) in a large sample of Dutch scuba divers who were free of any TMD complaints before they started diving actively. Five-hundred and thirty-six scuba divers (mean ± SD age = 40.4 ± 11.9 years; 34.1% women) completed a specifically developed questionnaire, either online or on paper. Stepwise forward logistic regression analysis was performed to predict the presence of TMD pain, with several potential risk factors as predictors. Four hundred and eighty-five of the 536 respondents were free of any TMD pain before they started diving actively. In this sample, TMD pain was present in 214 persons (44.1%). Four predictors contributed significantly to the presence of TMD pain, viz., clenching (OR = 2.466), warm water (OR = 1.685), biting on the mouthpiece (OR = 1.598), and the quality rating of the mouthpiece (OR = 0.887, that is, a higher rating means a smaller odds of having TMD pain). TMD pain is a common complaint among scuba divers who were free of such complaints before they started diving actively. Clenching, biting on the mouthpiece, and a low rating of the mouthpiece are predictors for the presence of TMD pain in scuba divers, while diving in cold water serves as a protective factor for TMD pain. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| India | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Egypt | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 62 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 47% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 19 | 30% |
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 17 September 2019.
All research outputs
#16,686,424
of 24,542,484 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
#736
of 1,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,254
of 232,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,542,484 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,265 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 232,625 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.