↓ Skip to main content

Powered versus manual toothbrushing for oral health

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2014
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
239 tweeters
facebook
15 Facebook pages
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
4 Google+ users
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 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
Powered versus manual toothbrushing for oral health
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002281.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yaacob M, Worthington HV, Deacon SA, Deery C, Walmsley AD, Robinson PG, Glenny AM, Munirah Yaacob, Helen V Worthington, Scott A Deacon, Chris Deery, A Damien Walmsley, Peter G Robinson, Anne-Marie Glenny, Yaacob, Munirah, Worthington, Helen V, Deacon, Scott A, Deery, Chris, Walmsley, A Damien, Robinson, Peter G, Glenny, Anne-Marie

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 239 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 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
India 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 153 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 23%
Student > Bachelor 29 18%
Student > Postgraduate 26 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 10%
Unspecified 11 7%
Other 43 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 113 70%
Unspecified 14 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Other 12 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 308. 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 11 August 2018.
All research outputs
#30,415
of 11,818,178 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#66
of 9,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#503
of 188,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,818,178 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,134 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 188,168 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 213 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.