↓ Skip to main content

Three-dimensional computer-guided implant placement in oligodontia

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Implant Dentistry, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Three-dimensional computer-guided implant placement in oligodontia
Published in
International Journal of Implant Dentistry, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40729-017-0090-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marieke A. P. Filius, Joep Kraeima, Arjan Vissink, Krista I. Janssen, Gerry M. Raghoebar, Anita Visser, Marieke A. P. Filius, Joep Kraeima, Arjan Vissink, Krista I. Janssen, Gerry M. Raghoebar, Anita Visser

Abstract

The aim of computer-designed surgical templates is to attain higher precision and accuracy of implant placement, particularly for compromised cases. The purpose of this study is to show the benefit of a full three-dimensional virtual workflow to guide implant placement in oligodontia cases where treatment is challenging due compromised bone quantity and limited interdental spaces. A full, digitalized workflow was performed for implant placement in two oligodontia patients. Accuracy was assessed by calculating the coordinates of the entry point (shoulder) and apex (tip) as well as the angular deviation of the planned and actual implants. Implant placement could be well performed with the developed computer-designed templates in oligodontia. Mean shoulder deviation was 1.41 mm (SD 0.55), mean apical deviation was 1.20 mm (SD 0.54) and mean angular deviation was 5.27° (SD 2.51). Application of computer-designed surgical templates, as described in this technical advanced article, aid in predictable implant placement in oligodontia where bone quantity is scarce and interdental spaces are limited.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Postgraduate 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 8 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 48%
Engineering 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 29%

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 15 July 2017.
All research outputs
#6,861,736
of 11,467,880 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Implant Dentistry
#8
of 27 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,585
of 259,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Implant Dentistry
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,467,880 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 27 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.5. This one scored the same or higher as 19 of them.
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 259,014 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them