↓ Skip to main content

The CATFISH study protocol: an evaluation of a water fluoridation scheme

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Oral Health, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

1 policy source
3 tweeters


5 Dimensions

Readers on

62 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.
The CATFISH study protocol: an evaluation of a water fluoridation scheme
Published in
BMC Oral Health, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12903-016-0169-0
Pubmed ID

Michaela Goodwin, Richard Emsley, Michael Kelly, Eric Rooney, Matthew Sutton, Martin Tickle, Rebecca Wagstaff, Tanya Walsh, William Whittaker, Iain A Pretty


Tooth decay is the commonest disease of childhood. We have known for over 90 years that fluoride can prevent tooth decay; it is present in nearly all toothpastes and can be provided in mouthwashes, gels and varnishes. The oldest method of applying fluoride is via the water supply at a concentration of 1 part per million. The two most important reviews of water fluoridation in the United Kingdom (the York Review and MRC Report on water fluoridation and health) concluded that whilst there was evidence to suggest water fluoridation provided a benefit in caries reduction, there was a need to improve the evidence base in several areas. This study will use a natural experiment to assess the incidence of caries in two geographical areas, one in which the water supply is returned to being fluoridated following a discontinuation of fluoridation and one that continues to have a non-fluoridated water supply. The oral health of two discrete study populations will be evaluated - those born 9 months after the water fluoridation was introduced, and those who were in their 1st year of school after the introduction of fluoridated water. Both populations will be followed prospectively for 5 years using a census approach in the exposed group along with matched numbers recruitment in a non-exposed control. Parents of the younger cohort will complete questionnaires every 6 months with child clinical examination at ages 3 and 5, whilst the older cohort will have clinical examinations only, at approximately 5, 7 and 11 years old. This project provides a unique opportunity to conduct a high quality evaluation of the reintroduction of a water fluoridation scheme, which satisfies the inclusion criteria stipulated by the York systematic review and can address the design issues identified in the MRC report. The research will make a major contribution to the understanding of the costs and effects of water fluoridation in the UK in the 21st Century. Its findings will help inform UK policy on this important public health intervention and may have a significant impact on public health policy in other developed countries. There is currently true equipoise in relation to the effectiveness of water fluoridation in contemporary populations and while the biological plausibility is well established, there is a need to examine impact on the changing epidemiological status of dental decay.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 18%
Professor 7 11%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Librarian 4 6%
Other 17 27%
Unknown 12 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 45%
Social Sciences 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 15 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 January 2020.
All research outputs
of 16,607,885 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
of 934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 268,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,607,885 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 934 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 268,325 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
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