↓ Skip to main content

Awareness and attitude toward using dental magnification among dental students and residents at King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Awareness and attitude toward using dental magnification among dental students and residents at King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry
Published in
BMC Oral Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12903-016-0254-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Turki Y. Alhazzazi, Nouran A. Alzebiani, Samaher K. Alotaibi, Dania F. Bogari, Ghaida T. Bakalka, Loai W. Hazzazi, Ahmed M. Jan, Neville J. McDonald

Abstract

The authors conducted a study aimed to assess the awareness and attitude among dental students and residents at King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Dentistry (KAUFD) toward using dental magnification. An e-questionnaire was formulated then sent to dental students and residents (n = 651). The questionnaire included questions that assessed both the awareness and attitude toward using dental magnification. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS version 22. The chi-square test was used to establish relationships between categorical variables. The response rate was 69.7 % (n = 454). Of those, 78.1 % did not use magnification during dental procedures. However, 81.8 % agreed that dental magnification could enhance the accuracy and quality of their dental work. Thus, 91.6 % thought it would be useful in endodontics and 46.3 % voted for surgery. Of the 21.9 % that used magnification, dental loupes were mostly used, 55.9 %. The majority (59.4 %) of the participants believed that using dental magnification should be introduced by faculty beginning in Year I of dental school. Among our respondents, most of the undergraduate students did not use dental magnification nor attended courses in the use of dental magnifications. However, most of the students were aware of its significance in improving the accuracy and quality of their work.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 14%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 16 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 33%
Unspecified 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 17 47%
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 05 June 2019.
All research outputs
#16,064,104
of 23,845,863 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#789
of 1,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,803
of 367,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#19
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,845,863 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 367,108 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.