↓ Skip to main content

A survey of UK dental health professionals using a medicines information service: what questions do they ask and do they get useful answers?

Overview of attention for article published in British Dental Journal, July 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
A survey of UK dental health professionals using a medicines information service: what questions do they ask and do they get useful answers?
Published in
British Dental Journal, July 2011
DOI 10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.522
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. E. McEntee, S. L. Henderson, P. M. Rutter, J. Rutter, H. J. Davis, C. J. Randall

Abstract

Dentists prescribe a limited range of medicines but it is important that they consider the effects of all medicines their patients are taking when providing dental care. In the UK, a national medicines information (UKMi) service funded by the National Health Service is available to advise health professionals on prescribing and to support evidence-based practice. This paper presents the results of a survey of 151 dental health professionals who contacted the UKMi service for advice. Enquiries most commonly involved antibiotics (32%), but dental health professionals also asked for advice on legal issues relating to medicines (10%), and on managing patients receiving bisphosphonates (9%), local anaesthetics (6%) and antiplatelet drugs (5%). One hundred and forty-six (97%) enquirers used the advice provided: for managing current patients, planning the care of future patients, for continuing professional development and teaching others. Two thirds of enquirers used the information provided to check if current or proposed management was appropriate, one half to change therapy and over one quarter to identify, manage or avoid adverse effects or drug interactions.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 7%
Unknown 41 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 12 27%
Unknown 6 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 59%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Computer Science 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 7 16%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 May 2013.
All research outputs
#13,675,566
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from British Dental Journal
#3,618
of 6,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,664
of 116,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Dental Journal
#26
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,027 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 116,293 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 52% of its contemporaries.