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 |
In situ remineralisation response of different artificial caries-like enamel lesions to home-care and professional fluoride treatments
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Oral Health, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12903-016-0160-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Priscila Maria Aranda Salomão, Lívia Picchi Comar, Marília Afonso Rabelo Buzalaf, Ana Carolina Magalhães |
| Abstract |
Artificial lesions produced by different protocols might directly influence the response to different remineralising treatments. This study compared the response of different artificial caries-like enamel lesions to home-care and professional fluoride based-remineralising treatments in situ. The tested demineralising protocols were methylcellulose- MC gel, polyacrylic acid - PA gel, tetraethyl methylene diphosphanate - TEMDP solution, and acetate- Buffer solution. The lesions were remineralised using an in situ model, following a crossover and double blind design. Twelve subjects wore intra-oral appliances during 3 phases (3 d each): control (C) (saliva); home-care F(-) treatment (FD) (1,100 ppm F(-) dentifrice, 2x1 min/day); and professional (FVD) (22,600 ppm F(-) varnish) plus FD. The de-remineralisation was measured by transverse microradiography-TMR and hardness (surface hardness/cross-sectional hardness, SH/CSH, respectively). For SH, lesions produced by PA gel were the only one showing significant differences among the remineralising treatments (C x FD x FVD); while the TEMDP lesion were not responsive to any fluoride treatment (for both SH/CSH). For TMR, there were no differences among the remineralising treatments, regardless of the type of lesion. Generally, the most responsive lesions to fluoride were the less demineralised lesions (considering hardness: PA gel and Buffer). The type of lesion has influence on the surface remineralisation degree induced by home-care and professional fluoride treatments using this in situ model. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 20 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 56% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 22 | 33% |
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 24 January 2016.
All research outputs
#20,302,535
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#1,161
of 1,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#330,633
of 393,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#21
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 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 1,470 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. 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 393,792 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 32 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.