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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| 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 |
Munirah Yaacob, Helen V Worthington, Scott A Deacon, Chris Deery, A Damien Walmsley, Peter G Robinson, Anne‐Marie Glenny |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 280 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 35 | 13% |
| Spain | 29 | 10% |
| United States | 20 | 7% |
| Japan | 13 | 5% |
| Canada | 9 | 3% |
| Australia | 7 | 3% |
| Saudi Arabia | 6 | 2% |
| Chile | 6 | 2% |
| Italy | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 35 | 13% |
| Unknown | 116 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 199 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 47 | 17% |
| Scientists | 26 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 7 | 3% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 608 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 599 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 102 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 84 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 71 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 33 | 5% |
| Other | 87 | 14% |
| Unknown | 191 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 310 | 51% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 5% |
| Psychology | 10 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 1% |
| Engineering | 7 | 1% |
| Other | 51 | 8% |
| Unknown | 195 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 970. 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 18 April 2024.
All research outputs
#17,328
of 25,818,700 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#36
of 13,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93
of 243,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,818,700 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 13,130 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.3. 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 243,642 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 239 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.