↓ Skip to main content

Historical and contemporary hypotheses on the development of oral diseases: are we there yet?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
329 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
Historical and contemporary hypotheses on the development of oral diseases: are we there yet?
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, July 2014
DOI 10.3389/fcimb.2014.00092
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bob T. Rosier, Marko De Jager, Egija Zaura, Bastiaan P. Krom

Abstract

Dental plaque is an oral biofilm that much like the rest of our microbiome has a role in health and disease. Specifically, it is the cause of very common oral diseases such as caries, gingivitis, and periodontitis. The ideas about oral disease development have evolved over time. In the nineteenth century, scientists could not identify bacteria related to disease due to the lack of technology. This led to the "Non-Specific Plaque Hypothesis" or the idea that the accumulation of dental plaque was responsible for oral disease without discriminating between the levels of virulence of bacteria. In the twentieth century this idea evolved with the techniques to analyze the changes from health to disease. The first common hypothesis was the "Specific Plaque Hypothesis" (1976) proposing that only a few species of the total microflora are actively involved in disease. Secondly, the "Non-Specific Plaque Hypothesis" was updated (1986) and the idea that the overall activity of the total microflora could lead to disease, was enriched by taking into account difference in virulence among bacteria. Then, a hypothesis was considered that combines key concepts of the earlier two hypotheses: the "Ecological Plaque Hypothesis" (1994), which proposes that disease is the result of an imbalance in the microflora by ecological stress resulting in an enrichment of certain disease-related micro-organisms. Finally, the recent "Keystone-Pathogen Hypothesis" (2012) proposes that certain low-abundance microbial pathogens can cause inflammatory disease by interfering with the host immune system and remodeling the microbiota. In this comprehensive review, we describe how these different hypotheses, and the ideas around them, arose and test their current applicability to the understanding of the development of oral disease. Finally, we conclude that an all-encompassing ecological hypothesis explaining the shifts from health to disease is still lacking.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 329 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 326 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 54 16%
Student > Bachelor 39 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 12%
Student > Postgraduate 30 9%
Researcher 24 7%
Other 54 16%
Unknown 90 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 131 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 5%
Unspecified 8 2%
Other 31 9%
Unknown 94 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 12 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,140,691
of 25,388,229 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#359
of 8,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,756
of 237,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#3
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,388,229 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 237,148 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 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 93% of its contemporaries.