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 |
Evaluation of piezocision and laser-assisted flapless corticotomy in the acceleration of canine retraction: a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Head & Face Medicine, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13005-018-0161-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alaa M. H. Alfawal, Mohammad Y. Hajeer, Mowaffak A. Ajaj, Omar Hamadah, Bassel Brad |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the effectiveness of two minimally invasive surgical procedures in the acceleration of canine retraction: piezocision and laser-assisted flapless corticotomy (LAFC). Trial design: A single-centre randomized controlled trial with a compound design (two-arm parallel-group design and a split-mouth design for each arm). 36 Class II division I patients (12 males, 24 females; age range: 15 to 27 years) requiring first upper premolars extraction followed by canine retraction. piezocision group (PG; n = 18) and laser-assisted flapless corticotomy group (LG; n = 18). A split-mouth design was applied for each group where the flapless surgical intervention was randomly allocated to one side and the other side served as a control side. the rate of canine retraction (primary outcome), anchorage loss and canine rotation, which were assessed at 1, 2, 3 and 4 months following the onset of canine retraction. Also the duration of canine retraction was recorded. Random sequence: Computer-generated random numbers. Allocation concealment: sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. Blinding: Single blinded (outcomes' assessor). Seventeen patients in each group were enrolled in the statistical analysis. The rate of canine retraction was significantly greater in the experimental side than in the control side in both groups by two-fold in the first month and 1.5-fold in the second month (p < 0.001). Also the overall canine retraction duration was significantly reduced in the experimental side as compared with control side in both groups about 25% (p ≤ 0.001). There were no significant differences between the experimental and the control sides regarding loss of anchorage and upper canine rotation in both groups (p > 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two flapless techniques regarding the studied variables during all evaluation times (p > 0.05). Piezocision and laser-assisted flapless corticotomy appeared to be effective treatment methods for accelerating canine retraction without any significant untoward effect on anchorage or canine rotation during rapid retraction. ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02606331 ). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 156 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 5% |
| Researcher | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 10% |
| Unknown | 61 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 85 | 54% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 1% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | <1% |
| Psychology | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 3% |
| Unknown | 61 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,967,526
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Head & Face Medicine
#119
of 334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,078
of 330,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Head & Face Medicine
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 334 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 330,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.