↓ Skip to main content

Clinical association between teeth malocclusions, wrong posture and ocular convergence disorders: an epidemiological investigation on primary school children

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
37 X users
facebook
37 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 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
Clinical association between teeth malocclusions, wrong posture and ocular convergence disorders: an epidemiological investigation on primary school children
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2431-13-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Armando Silvestrini-Biavati, Marco Migliorati, Eleonora Demarziani, Simona Tecco, Piero Silvestrini-Biavati, Antonella Polimeni, Matteo Saccucci

Abstract

As the various systems in the body are inter-connected to form a single structural unit, a pathological condition in one area can also affect other areas. There are many known correlations between the visual and motor system. The importance of visual function, particularly the paracentral peripheral field of view, in motor coordination, ambulation and the maintenance of balance has been amply demonstrated.In line with current medical principles, which are moving towards a more holistic view of the human body, this study aims to investigate, in an interdisciplinary manner, the incidence of dental malocclusions together with posture and eye convergence disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 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 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 196 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 27 14%
Student > Master 26 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 9%
Student > Postgraduate 17 9%
Other 42 21%
Unknown 49 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 98 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 8%
Sports and Recreations 6 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Other 14 7%
Unknown 54 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 03 February 2019.
All research outputs
#1,155,116
of 25,591,967 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#113
of 3,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,748
of 289,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#5
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,591,967 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,478 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 289,330 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.