↓ Skip to main content

Medical screening in dental settings: a qualitative study of the views of authorities and organizations

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Medical screening in dental settings: a qualitative study of the views of authorities and organizations
Published in
BMC Research Notes, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-1543-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Göran Friman, Margareta Hultin, Gunnar H. Nilsson, Inger Wårdh

Abstract

The practice of identifying individuals with undiagnosed diabetes mellitus type II or undiagnosed hypertension by medical screening in dental settings has been received positively by both patients and dentistry professionals. This identification has also shown to be cost-effective by achieving savings and health benefits, but no investigation has been made of the attitudes of authorities and organizations. The aim of this study was to describe the views of authorities and organizations. Thirteen authorities and organizations were interviewed of the sample of 20 requested. Seven approached authorities and organizations did not believe it was relevant to participate in the study. The manifest analysis resulted in four categories: medical screening ought to be established in the society; dentistry must have relevant competence to perform medical screening; medical screening requires cooperation between dentistry and health care; and dentistry is not the only context where medical screening could be performed. The latent analysis resulted in an emerging theme: positive to, but uncertain about, the concept of medical screening in dental settings. The spokespersons for the approached authorities and organizations had a positive view of medical screening but the respondents experienced a lack of facts concerning the scientific communities' position, guidelines and procedures in the topic. Approached authorities and organizations generally had a positive view of medical screening in dental settings but were uncertain about the concept. Further scientific knowledge and guidelines concerning the topic are needed before it can be commonly introduced and additional research on implementation strategies and long-term follow-up of medical screening are needed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Master 3 11%
Librarian 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 8 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 26%
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 19 October 2015.
All research outputs
#20,550,733
of 23,124,001 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,587
of 4,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,734
of 284,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#151
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,124,001 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 4,290 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. 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 284,540 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 193 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.