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 |
Interradicular trabecular bone density of the lateral maxilla for temporary anchorage devices – a histomorphometric study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Head & Face Medicine, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13005-015-0058-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elena Krieger, Heinrich Wehrbein |
| Abstract |
To analyze the interradicular trabecular bone density of the lateral maxilla regarding the insertion of temporary anchorage devices (TADs). The material consisted of tissue blocks of autopsy material from 20 subjects (17 male, 3 female, 16 - 63y). The specimens comprised the dentated alveolar bone of the lateral maxilla. The interradicular areas (IRA) from canine to distally of the second molar (IRA 3-4, 4-5, 5-6, 6-7, 7d) were histomorphometrically measured with respect to the hard tissue fraction of the trabecular bone (HTFTB, %) and statistically analyzed. Histomorphometric measurements showed the following results: Mean HTFTB of IRA 3-4 was 44.08%, of IRA 4-5 31.07%, of IRA 5-6 33.96%, of IRA 6-7 36.33% and of IRA 7d 25.40%. Only the difference between the HTFTB of IRA 3-4 and the other IRAs was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Regarding the minimum and maximum HTFTB value of each IRA, there was a great amount of difference, especially for IRA 3-4: minimum HTFTB was 17.20% and maximum 67.03%. Apart from the IRA between canine and first premolar, the HTFTB in the IRAs of the lateral maxilla have to be classified as low or even moderate. IRA 3-4 should also be considered cautious regarding its minimum values. Thus, it seems that the interradicular trabecular bone density of the lateral maxilla is unfavorable to achieve a good primary stability of TADs. |
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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 34 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 22% |
| Unknown | 9 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 61% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
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 02 March 2015.
All research outputs
#14,214,321
of 22,787,797 outputs
Outputs from Head & Face Medicine
#101
of 334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,576
of 352,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Head & Face Medicine
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,787,797 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 64% 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 352,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 4 of them.