| Title |
Three-dimensional mapping of cortical bone thickness in subjects with different vertical facial dimensions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Progress in Orthodontics, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40510-016-0145-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mais Medhat Sadek, Noha Ezat Sabet, Islam Tarek Hassan |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to determine differences in cortical bone thickness among subjects with different vertical facial dimensions using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). From 114 pre-treatment CBCT scans, 48 scans were selected to be included in the study. CBCT-synthesized lateral cephalograms were used to categorize subjects into three groups based on their vertical skeletal pattern. Cortical bone thickness (CBT) at two vertical levels (4 and 7 mm) from the alveolar crest were measured in the entire tooth-bearing region in the maxilla and mandible. Significant group differences were detected with high-angle subjects having significantly narrower inter-radicular CBT at some sites as compared to average- and low-angle subjects. Inter-radicular cortical bone is thinner in high-angle than in average- or low-angle subjects in few selected sites at the vertical height in which mini-implants are commonly inserted for orthodontic anchorage. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 72 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 23% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 24 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 58% |
| Psychology | 1 | 1% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 1% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 28 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 November 2016.
All research outputs
#13,131,140
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Progress in Orthodontics
#55
of 234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,210
of 416,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Progress in Orthodontics
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 234 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 416,427 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.