↓ Skip to main content

Microbiological outcomes from different periodontal maintenance interventions: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Oral Research, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 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
Microbiological outcomes from different periodontal maintenance interventions: a systematic review
Published in
Brazilian Oral Research, May 2017
DOI 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2017vol310033
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patricia Daniela Melchiors ANGST, Amanda Finger STADLER, Rui Vicente OPPERMANN, Sabrina Carvalho GOMES

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the differences in the subgingival microbiological outcomes between periodontal patients submitted to a supragingival control (SPG) regimen as compared to subgingival scaling and root planing performed combined with supragingival debridement (SPG + SBG) intervention during the periodontal maintenance period (PMP). A systematic literature search using electronic databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE) was conducted looking for articles published up to August 2016 and independent of language. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, quality assessment and data collection. Only human randomized or non-randomized clinical trials with at least 6-months-follow-up after periodontal treatment and presenting subgingival microbiological outcomes related to SPG and/or SPG+SBG therapies were included. Search strategy found 2,250 titles. Among these, 148 (after title analysis) and 39 (after abstract analysis) papers were considered to be relevant. Finally, 19 studies were selected after full-text analysis. No article had a direct comparison between the therapies. Five SPG and 14 SPG+SBG studies presented experimental groups with these respective regimens and were descriptively analyzed while most of the results were only presented graphically. The results showed that both SPG and SPG+SBG protocols of PMP determined stability in the microbiological results along time. Nevertheless, new studies comparing these interventions in PMP are needed, especially if the limitations herein discussed could be better controlled.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 33%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 17%
Unknown 2 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 17%
Unknown 2 33%

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 13 June 2017.
All research outputs
#7,072,684
of 11,357,505 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Oral Research
#51
of 149 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,722
of 267,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Oral Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,357,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 149 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 267,227 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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