↓ Skip to main content

Oral care and nosocomial pneumonia: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Einstein (São Paulo), May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
195 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
Oral care and nosocomial pneumonia: a systematic review
Published in
Einstein (São Paulo), May 2015
DOI 10.1590/s1679-45082015rw2980
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Carolina Nunes Vilela, Gustavo Zanna Ferreira, Paulo Sérgio da Silva Santos, Nathalie Pepe Medeiros de Rezende

Abstract

To perform a systematic review of the literature on the control of oral biofilms and the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia, in addition to assessing and classifying studies as to the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. The review was based on PubMed, LILACS, and Scopus databases, from January 1st, 2000 until December 31st, 2012. Studies evaluating oral hygiene care related to nosocomial infections in patients hospitalized in intensive care units were selected according to the inclusion criteria. Full published articles available in English, Spanish, or Portuguese, which approached chemical or mechanical oral hygiene techniques in preventing pneumonia, interventions performed, and their results were included. After analysis, the articles were classified according to level of evidence and grade of recommendation according to the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. A total of 297 abstracts were found, 14 of which were full articles that met our criteria. Most articles included a study group with chlorhexidine users and a control group with placebo users for oral hygiene in the prevention of pneumonia. All articles were classified as B in the level of evidence, and 12 articles were classified as 2B and two articles as 2C in grade of recommendation. It was observed that the control of oral biofilm reduces the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia, but the fact that most articles had an intermediate grade of recommendation makes clear the need to conduct randomized controlled trials with minimal bias to establish future guidelines for oral hygiene in intensive care units.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 193 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 31 16%
Student > Master 27 14%
Student > Postgraduate 19 10%
Other 17 9%
Researcher 12 6%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 58 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 77 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 14%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 64 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 June 2015.
All research outputs
#14,915,476
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Einstein (São Paulo)
#171
of 576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,742
of 278,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Einstein (São Paulo)
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 278,918 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.