↓ Skip to main content

Effect of non-fluoride agents on the prevention of dental caries in primary dentition: A systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
reddit
1 Redditor
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
194 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.
Article details
Title
Effect of non-fluoride agents on the prevention of dental caries in primary dentition: A systematic review
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0182221
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To assess the effect of non-fluoride agents on the prevention of dental caries in primary dentition. Medline, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, CBM and CNKI databases were searched to identify all the relevant articles published prior to 16 December 2016. Grey literature was also searched. Randomized controlled human clinical trials in which non-fluoride agents were delivered by any method were considered. Of the 1,236 studies screened, 39 full articles were scrutinized and 14 selected for inclusion in the final sample. Five chemical agents, namely arginine, casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP), chlorhexidine, triclosan and xylitol were investigated in these included studies. The cariostatic effects of non-fluoride agents in vivo were evaluated in comparison with fluoride or placebos in randomized controlled trials. There is evidence that the use of certain doses of xylitol may be effective in arresting dental caries in primary dentition. However, quantitative synthesis could not be carried out because of the clinical and methodological heterogeneity of the included studies. A study at low risk of bias indicated that daily use of xylitol wipes is a useful adjunct for caries control in young children, however, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution as this study had a very limited sample size. Chlorhexidine and CPP-ACP may be more effective than a placebo in managing caries in primary dentition, but their effectiveness is borderline when compared with fluoride. Arginine-containing mint confection and 0.3% triclosan varnish were found to reduce caries development in primary teeth but the evidence was at high risk of bias. High quality randomized controlled trials are needed in order to make a conclusive recommendation.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 194 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 32 16%
Student > Master 28 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Professor 9 5%
Other 33 17%
Unknown 67 35%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 90 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Materials Science 5 3%
Environmental Science 3 2%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 72 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 December 2023.
All research outputs
#5,406,284
of 32,266,838 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#52,554
of 216,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,799
of 347,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,047
of 4,249 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,266,838 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 216,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 347,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,249 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.