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 |
Intakes of calcium, vitamin D, and dairy servings and dental plaque in older Danish adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Journal, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2891-12-61 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amanda RA Adegboye, Lisa B Christensen, Poul Holm-Pedersen, Kirsten Avlund, Barbara J Boucher, Berit L Heitmann |
| Abstract |
BACKGROUND: To investigate whether intakes of calcium and dairy-servings within-recommendations were associated with plaque score when allowing for vitamin D intakes. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, including 606 older Danish adults, total dietary calcium intake (mg/day) was classified as below vs. within-recommendations and dairy intake as <3 vs. >=3 servings/ d. Dental plaque, defined as the percentage of tooth surfaces exhibiting plaque, was classified as < median vs. >=median value (9.5%). Analyses were stratified by lower and higher (>=6.8 mug/d) vitamin D intake. FINDINGS: Intakes of calcium (OR = 0.53; 95%CI = 0.31--0.92) and dairy servings (OR = 0.54; 95%CI = 0.33--0.89) within-recommendations were significantly associated with lower plaque score after adjustments for age, gender, education, intakes of alcohol, sucrose and mineral supplements, smoking, diseases, number of teeth, visits to the dentist, use of dental floss/tooth pick and salivary flow, among those with higher, but not lower, vitamin D intake. CONCLUSION: Intakes of calcium dairy-servings within-recommendations were inversely associated with plaque, among those with higher, but not lower, vitamin D intakes. Due to the cross-sectional nature of the study, it is not possible to infer that this association is causal. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 States | 6 | 55% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 9% |
| Denmark | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 82% |
| Scientists | 1 | 9% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 14% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 19% |
| Unknown | 20 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 33% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 December 2014.
All research outputs
#3,119,474
of 24,318,236 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#639
of 1,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,121
of 198,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#25
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,318,236 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,468 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 198,445 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.