↓ Skip to main content

An Overview of U.S. Predoctoral Dental Implant Programs and Their Directors

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Dental Education, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
An Overview of U.S. Predoctoral Dental Implant Programs and Their Directors
Published in
Journal of Dental Education, March 2015
DOI 10.1002/j.0022-0337.2015.79.3.tb05881.x
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The aim of this study was to provide an overview of current predoctoral implant programs in the United States, including curricular characteristics and clinical practices regarding implant therapy education and program directors' characteristics. An electronic survey was sent to predoctoral implant program directors of all 64 accredited U.S. dental schools; 52 of the 60 eligible programs responded, for a response rate of 87%. The responding program directors were primarily affiliated with either prosthodontics departments (44%) or restorative dentistry departments (40%). Structurally, 80.8% of the responding schools integrate their implant programs into the third year of the curriculum. Clinical implant therapy exercises reported were simulation exercises without direct patient care (90.4% of responding schools) and direct patient care under supervision (94.2%). The most frequently taught restorative modalities are posterior single-tooth implant crown (96.2%), mandibular implant-retained overdenture (88.5%), and anterior implant-supported single crown (61.5%). A majority (74.5%) of responding programs utilize analog surgical guide planning, while 25.5% reported use of digital guided surgery planning software. All schools in the Northwest and 66.7% in the South Central regions utilize custom abutments as the primary abutment design, while a majority of schools in the North Central (62.5%), Northeast (53.8%), Southwest (66.7%), and Southeast (80%) regions use stock abutments (p=0.02). Regional differences were significant with regard to fixation modality, with all the Northwest programs using screw retention and 90% of Southeast and 87.5% of North Central programs using cement retention (p=0.002). This study demonstrated that while institutions share program director and curricular similarities, clinical practices and modalities vary significantly by region.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 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 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 25%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Researcher 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 20 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 21 34%
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 March 2015.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Dental Education
#908
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,227
of 271,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Dental Education
#22
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 271,003 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.