↓ Skip to main content

Orthodontic treatment for distalising upper first molars in children and adolescents

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
19 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
156 Mendeley
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.
Title
Orthodontic treatment for distalising upper first molars in children and adolescents
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008375.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Safa Jambi, Badri Thiruvenkatachari, Kevin D O'Brien, Tanya Walsh

Abstract

When orthodontic treatment is provided with fixed appliances, it is sometimes necessary to move the upper molar teeth backwards (distalise) to create space or help to overcome anchorage requirements. This can be achieved with the use of extraoral or intraoral appliances. The most common appliance is extraoral headgear, which requires considerable patient co-operation. Further, reports of serious injuries have been published. Intraoral appliances have been developed to overcome such shortcomings. The comparative effects of extraoral and intraoral appliances have not been fully evaluated.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 149 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 15%
Student > Postgraduate 14 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Other 39 25%
Unknown 23 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 89 57%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 7%
Social Sciences 8 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 33 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 21 December 2017.
All research outputs
#894,900
of 13,944,353 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,760
of 10,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,660
of 184,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#28
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,944,353 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 184,117 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.