↓ Skip to main content

Prevalence and factors associated with pulp stones: a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Applied Oral Science, January 2026
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
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
Prevalence and factors associated with pulp stones: a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.
Published in
Journal of Applied Oral Science, January 2026
DOI 10.1590/1678-7765-2026-0252
Pubmed ID
Authors

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.
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.
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 19 August 2026.
All research outputs
#28,629,235
of 34,394,870 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Oral Science
#376
of 805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#271,403
of 378,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Oral Science
#4
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,394,870 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 805 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 378,821 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 56 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.