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 |
Twenty-year clinical experience with fixed functional appliances
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1590/2177-6709.23.2.087-109.sar |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexandre Moro, Suellen W. Borges, Paula Porto Spada, Nathaly D. Morais, Gisele Maria Correr, Cauby M. Chaves, Lucia H. S. Cevidanes |
| Abstract |
Considering the large number of fixed functional appliances, choosing the best device for your patient is not an easy task. To describe the development of fixed functional appliances as well as our 20-year experience working with them. Fixed functional appliances are grouped into flexible, rigid and hybrid. They are different appliances, whose action is described here. Four clinical cases will be reported with a view to illustrating the different appliances. Rigid fixed functional appliances provide better skeletal results than flexible and hybrid ones. Flexible and hybrid appliances have similar effects to those produced by Class II elastics. They ultimately correct Class II with dentoalveolar changes. From a biomechanical standpoint, fixed functional appliances are more recommended to treat Class II in dolichofacial patients, in comparison to Class II elastics. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 111 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 6% |
| Researcher | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Unknown | 39 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 58 | 52% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 40% |
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 17 September 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
#142
of 459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,892
of 343,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 459 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
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 343,807 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them