↓ Skip to main content

Characterizations of oral microbiota in elderly nursing home residents with diabetes

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Oral Science, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Characterizations of oral microbiota in elderly nursing home residents with diabetes
Published in
Journal of Oral Science, October 2017
DOI 10.2334/josnusd.16-0722
Pubmed ID
Authors

Taiji Ogawa, Mariko Honda-Ogawa, Kazunori Ikebe, Yumiko Notomi, Yoshiko Iwamoto, Itsuki Shirobayashi, Seiko Hata, Masahito Kibi, Shizuko Masayasu, Satoshi Sasaki, Shigetada Kawabata, Yoshinobu Maeda

Abstract

Over 700 bacterial species have been detected in the oral cavity. Several studies have suggested that periodontitis is associated with systemic disorders such as diabetes mellitus, indicating a key role for oral microbiota in human health. However, the relationship between oral microbiota and diabetes has not been well clarified. Therefore, we conducted microbiome analysis of saliva samples obtained from 15 elderly residents (3 with type 2 diabetes mellitus [DM] and 12 without diabetes [non-DM]) at three different nursing homes, as well as 9 young healthy controls (HC). Genomic DNA was extracted from each sample, and then the V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene was amplified and sequenced. Alpha diversity, in terms of operational taxonomic unit richness, was significantly higher in samples from the non-DM group than in those from the HC group. Weighted UniFrac distance analysis showed that salivary microbial communities in the DM group were separately clustered. Furthermore, in the DM group, Actinomyces and Selenomonas showed significantly higher abundance, whereas Alloprevotella showed significantly lower abundance, relative to the non-DM group. Although our findings were limited by the small sample size, oral bacterial diversity in the DM group was clearly different from that in the non-DM group.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 18%
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Researcher 9 8%
Other 6 6%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 29 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 33 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 12 October 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Oral Science
#173
of 369 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,351
of 332,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Oral Science
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 369 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 332,159 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.