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 |
Protocol for “Seal or Varnish?” (SoV) trial: a randomised controlled trial to measure the relative cost and effectiveness of pit and fissure sealants and fluoride varnish in preventing dental decay
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Oral Health, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6831-12-51 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ivor Gordon Chestnutt, Barbara Lesley Chadwick, Simon Hutchings, Rebecca Playle, Timothy Pickles, Catherine Lisles, Nigel Kirkby, Maria Zeta Morgan, Lindsay Hunter, Ceri Hodell, Beverely Withers, Simon Murphy, Sarah Morgan-Trimmer, Deborah Fitzsimmons, Ceri Phillips, Jacqueline Nuttall, Kerenza Hood |
| Abstract |
Dental caries remains a significant public health problem, prevalence being linked to social and economic deprivation. Occlusal surfaces of first permanent molars are the most susceptible site in the developing permanent dentition. Cochrane reviews have shown pit and fissure sealants (PFS) and fluoride varnish (FV) to be effective over no intervention in preventing caries. However, the comparative cost and effectiveness of these treatments is uncertain. The primary aim of the trial described in this protocol is to compare the clinical effectiveness of PFS and FV in preventing dental caries in first permanent molars in 6-7 year-olds. Secondary aims include: establishing the costs and the relative cost-effectiveness of PFS and FV delivered in a community/school setting; examining the impact of PFS and FV on children and their parents/carers in terms of quality of life/treatment acceptability measures; and examining the implementation of treatment in a community setting. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 3 | 75% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 254 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Egypt | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 249 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 43 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 10% |
| Researcher | 16 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 44 | 17% |
| Unknown | 78 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 120 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Psychology | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 21 | 8% |
| Unknown | 82 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 June 2020.
All research outputs
#13,028,542
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#500
of 1,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,135
of 275,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#4
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,444 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 275,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.