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 |
Chronic gingivitis: the prevalence of periodontopathogens and therapy efficiency
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10096-011-1520-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. Igic, L. Kesic, V. Lekovic, M. Apostolovic, D. Mihailovic, L. Kostadinovic, J. Milasin |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to determine the level of gingival inflammation and the prevalence of periodontopathogenic microorganisms in adolescents with chronic gingivitis, as well as to compare the effectiveness of two approaches in gingivitis treatment-basic therapy alone and basic therapy + adjunctive low-level laser therapy (LLLT). After periodontal evaluation, the content of gingival pockets of 140 adolescents with gingivitis was analyzed by multiplex PCR for the presence of P. gingivalis, A. actinomycetemcomitans, T. forsythensis and P. intermedia. Subsequent to bacteria detection, the examinees were divided into two groups with homogenous clinical and microbiological characteristics. Group A was subjected to basic gingivitis therapy, and group B underwent basic therapy along with adjunctive LLLT. A statistically significant difference between the values of plaque-index (PI) and sulcus bleeding index (SBI) before and after therapy was confirmed in both groups (p<0.001), though more pronounced in group B. Following therapy, the incidence of periodontopathogenic microorganisms decreased considerably. The best result was obtained in P. gingivalis eradication by combined therapy (p=0.003). The presence of periodontopathogens in adolescents with gingivitis should be regarded as a sign for dentists to foster more effective oral health programs. LLLT appears to be beneficial as adjuvant to basic therapy. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 70 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 20 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 46% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 7% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 24 | 34% |
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 13 February 2012.
All research outputs
#15,241,801
of 22,662,201 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#1,863
of 2,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,968
of 241,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#21
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,662,201 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 241,639 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 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.