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 |
Removal and killing of multispecies endodontic biofilms by N-acetylcysteine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.bjm.2017.04.003 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Young-Suk Choi, Cheul Kim, Ji-Hoi Moon, Jin-Yong Lee |
| Abstract |
Removal of bacterial biofilm from the root canal system is essential for the management of endodontic disease. Here we evaluated the antibacterial effect of N-acetylcysteine (NAC), a potent antioxidant and mucolytic agent, against mature multispecies endodontic biofilms consisting of Actinomyces naeslundii, Lactobacillus salivarius, Streptococcus mutans and Enterococcus faecalis on sterile human dentin blocks. The biofilms were exposed to NAC (25, 50 and 100mg/mL), saturated calcium hydroxide or 2% chlorhexidine solution for 7 days, then examined by scanning electron microscopy. The biofilm viability was measured by viable cell counts and ATP-bioluminescence assay. NAC showed greater efficacy in biofilm cell removal and killing than the other root canal medicaments. Furthermore, 100mg/mL NAC disrupted the mature multispecies endodontic biofilms completely. These results demonstrate the potential use of NAC in root canal treatment. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 86 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Researcher | 5 | 6% |
| Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 38 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 27% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 7% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 43 | 50% |
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 23 January 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#824
of 1,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,707
of 324,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#11
of 21 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 1,377 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 324,458 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 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.