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 |
The influence of three different apical implant designs at stability and osseointegration process: experimental study in rabbits
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Oral Implants Research, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1111/clr.12807 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sergio A. Gehrke, Carlos Pérez‐Albacete Martínez, Adriano Piattelli, Jamil A. Shibli, Aleksa Markovic, José L. Calvo Guirado |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to perform a histomorphometric and biomechanical comparison of three implants with different designs of the apical area to promote a better bone initial stability and its correlation with the osseointegration. Fifty-four tapered implants with same length, diameter and surface properties but with three different apical configurations (Group I: MK4: Group II: C1 and Group III: MK7) were inserted in the tibia of rabbits. Implant stability and bone formation were evaluated by resonance frequency analysis measured at 0, 6, 8 and 12 weeks and by histomorphometric analysis performed at 6, 8 and 12 weeks. Statistical test to compare the stability through the implant stability quotient in the four times showed few differences between the groups and time periods proposed, with significance set at P < 0.05. In the bone-implant contact, by comparing the groups in the three times proposed, it was possible concluded that there is a similar behavior among the three implant design (P < 0.05). With the limitations of this animal study, it can be concluded that the design of the apical area influences the implant stability and the bone-to-implant contact. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 17% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 23% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 53% |
| Materials Science | 3 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
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 02 March 2016.
All research outputs
#22,003,549
of 24,549,201 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Oral Implants Research
#1,019
of 1,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#260,967
of 303,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Oral Implants Research
#29
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,549,201 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,222 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 303,714 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 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.