↓ Skip to main content

Resting salivary flow independently associated with oral malodor

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

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Resting salivary flow independently associated with oral malodor
Published in
BMC Oral Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12903-016-0255-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. Suzuki, A. Fujimoto, M. Yoneda, T. Watanabe, T. Hirofuji, T. Hanioka

Abstract

Dryness of the oral cavity is considered one cause of oral malodor. However, it is unclear which of the factors regulating the wetness of the oral cavity are involved in oral malodor development. This study investigated the effects of salivary flow and oral mucosal moisture on oral malodor. The study population comprised 119 patients (48 men and 71 women, mean age of 50.6 ± 15.4 years) with complaint of oral malodor. After the oral malodor level had been evaluated by the organoleptic test and gas chromatography, the rates of stimulated saliva and resting saliva and the moisture levels of the tongue and buccal mucosa were measured. The plaque index, bleeding on pocket probing, probing pocket depth, and tongue coating score were also assessed. Strong oral malodor was defined as an organoleptic test score of ≥3. The flow rate of resting saliva in women was significantly lower than in men. The flow rate of resting saliva and the moisture levels of the tongue and buccal mucosa showed significant negative correlations with age. The flow rate of resting saliva was significantly lower in patients with strong oral malodor than in those with no or weak oral malodor. The flow rate of stimulated saliva and the moisture levels of the tongue and buccal mucosa had no relationship with strong oral malodor. Logistic regression analysis showed that a ≥5-mm probing pocket depth with bleeding on pocket probing, an increased tongue coating score, and decreased resting salivary flow were strong explanatory factors in clinical findings for oral malodor. This study suggests that the flow rate of resting saliva is a significant modulating factor for oral malodor.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 14%
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Professor 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 8 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Unknown 9 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,414,746
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#1,179
of 1,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#317,860
of 363,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#26
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,486 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 363,706 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.