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 |
Antimicrobial and cytotoxic effects of phosphoric acid solution compared to other root canal irrigants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Applied Oral Science, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1678-775720130691 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maíra Prado, Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal da Silva, Thais Mageste Duque, Alexandre Augusto Zaia, Caio Cezar Randi Ferraz, José Flávio Affonso de Almeida, Brenda Paula Figueiredo de Almeida Gomes |
| Abstract |
Phosphoric acid has been suggested as an irrigant due to its effectiveness in removing the smear layer. The purpose of this study was to compare the antimicrobial and cytotoxic effects of a 37% phosphoric acid solution to other irrigants commonly used in endodontics. The substances 37% phosphoric acid, 17% EDTA, 10% citric acid, 2% chlorhexidine (solution and gel), and 5.25% NaOCl were evaluated. The antimicrobial activity was tested against Candida albicans, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis, Escherichia coli, Actinomyces meyeri, Parvimonas micra, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and Prevotella nigrescens according to the agar diffusion method. The cytotoxicity of the irrigants was determined by using the MTT assay. Phosphoric acid presented higher antimicrobial activity compared to the other tested irrigants. With regard to the cell viability, this solution showed results similar to those with 5.25% NaOCl and 2% chlorhexidine (gel and solution), whereas 17% EDTA and 10% citric acid showed higher cell viability compared to other irrigants. Phosphoric acid demonstrated higher antimicrobial activity and cytotoxicity similar to that of 5.25% NaOCl and 2% chlorhexidine (gel and solution). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 20 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 48% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 4% |
| Materials Science | 4 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 23 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 25 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,549,945
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Oral Science
#12
of 596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,534
of 359,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Oral Science
#1
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 596 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 359,515 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 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 96% of its contemporaries.