↓ Skip to main content

Evidence-based recommendation on toothpaste use

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Oral Research, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

5 tweeters
1 video uploader


45 Dimensions

Readers on

198 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.
Evidence-based recommendation on toothpaste use
Published in
Brazilian Oral Research, January 2014
DOI 10.1590/s1806-83242014.50000001
Pubmed ID

Jaime Aparecido Cury, Livia Maria Andaló Tenuta


Toothpaste can be used as a vehicle for substances to improve the oral health of individuals and populations. Therefore, it should be recommended based on the best scientific evidence available, and not on the opinion of authorities or specialists. Fluoride is the most important therapeutic substance used in toothpastes, adding to the effect of mechanical toothbrushing on dental caries control. The use of fluoride toothpaste to reduce caries in children and adults is strongly based on evidence, and is dependent on the concentration (minimum of 1000 ppm F) and frequency of fluoride toothpaste use (2'/day or higher). The risk of dental fluorosis due to toothpaste ingestion by children has been overestimated, since there is no evidence that: 1) fluoride toothpaste use should be postponed until the age of 3-4 or older, 2) low-fluoride toothpaste avoids fluorosis and 3) fluorosis has a detrimental effect on the quality of life of individuals exposed to fluoridated water and toothpaste. Among other therapeutic substances used in toothpastes, there is evidence that triclosan/copolymer reduce dental biofilm, gingivitis, periodontitis, calculus and halitosis, and that toothpastes containing stannous fluoride reduce biofilm and gingivitis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 198 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 197 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 20%
Student > Master 36 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 7%
Researcher 14 7%
Other 39 20%
Unknown 40 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 117 59%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 5%
Psychology 4 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Chemistry 3 2%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 43 22%