↓ Skip to main content

Treatment needs and skill mix workforce requirements for prosthodontic care: a comparison of estimates using normative and sociodental approaches

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Oral Health, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Treatment needs and skill mix workforce requirements for prosthodontic care: a comparison of estimates using normative and sociodental approaches
Published in
BMC Oral Health, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12903-015-0015-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Norintan Ab-Murat, Aubrey Sheiham, Richard Watt, Georgios Tsakos

Abstract

The traditional measure for assessing dental treatment needs and workforce requirements based solely on normative need (NN) has major shortcomings. The sociodental approach (SDA) to assess needs overcomes some of the shortcomings as it combines normative and subjective needs assessments and also incorporates behavioural propensity (Sheiham and Tsakos 2007). The objective of this study was to estimate and compare prosthodontic treatment needs and workforce requirements, using the normative and the sociodental approaches for different skill mix models. A cross-sectional study was conducted on 732 university employees aged 30-54 years. Normative prosthodontic need was assessed using the WHO (1997) method. The SDA includes NN and also considers oral impacts, measured through the OIDP index, and behavioural propensity. Estimates of prosthodontic need and dental workforce requirements using the two methods were compared using McNemar and Wilcoxon Signed Rank test respectively. The dental workforce required for prosthodontic treatment based on NN and SDA approaches were then compared using different workforce skill mix models. The proportion of subjects needing prosthodontic treatment was lower by more than 90% when the SDA was used compared to NN. The number of dentists required for prosthodontic treatment per 100,000 people were 98.8 using NN compared to 2.49 using SDA. Using a skill mix approach, the requirements for dentists per 100,000 people decreased slightly when more denture procedures were delegated to dental therapists. There were very much lower levels of prosthodontic treatment needs and workforce requirements when using the sociodental approach compared to normative methods.

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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 19%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Other 13 25%
Unknown 14 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 16 30%
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 13 March 2015.
All research outputs
#18,402,666
of 22,794,367 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#995
of 1,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,379
of 260,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#22
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,794,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,467 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 260,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 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.