↓ Skip to main content

Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
28 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
258 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 prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003452.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Badri Thiruvenkatachari, Jayne E Harrison, Helen V Worthington, Kevin D O'Brien

Abstract

Prominent upper front teeth are a common problem affecting about a quarter of 12-year old children in the UK. The correction of this condition is one of the most common treatments performed by orthodontists. This condition develops when the child's permanent teeth erupt and children are often referred to an orthodontist for treatment with dental braces to reduce the prominence of the teeth. These teeth are more likely to be injured and their appearance can cause significant distress.If a child is referred at a young age, the orthodontist is faced with the dilemma of whether to treat the patient early or to wait until the child is older and provide treatment in early adolescence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 258 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 1%
Italy 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 251 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 58 22%
Student > Postgraduate 41 16%
Unspecified 30 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 10%
Student > Bachelor 22 9%
Other 82 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 177 69%
Unspecified 44 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Psychology 7 3%
Other 13 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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
#441,336
of 13,122,094 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,376
of 10,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,408
of 180,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#14
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,122,094 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,489 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 180,858 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.