↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Evaluation of calcified carotid atheroma on panoramic radiographs and Doppler ultrasonography in an older population

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of calcified carotid atheroma on panoramic radiographs and Doppler ultrasonography in an older population
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2015
DOI 10.2147/cia.s84683
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yusuf Atalay, Fahri Adali, Fatih Asutay, Mahmut Koparal, Belgin Gulsun, Kamil Serkan Agacayak

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the reliability of panoramic radiograph (PR) as a screening tool for the detection of calcified carotid atheroma (CCA) by comparing it with Doppler ultrasonography (DU) examination. A second aim was to evaluate the relationship among CCA, systemic diseases, smoking, and body mass index in an older population. A total of 1,650 PRs of patients aged over 45 years (736 males and 914 females) were randomly selected. All the patients had been referred to the Faculty of Dentistry, Afyon Kocatepe University, Afyonkarahisar, Turkey, during 2013-2014 for routine PR screening. Medical data were collected from the archival records of the dental school. The patients were divided into two groups: Group A (study group), CCA findings were confirmed by DU (n=59); and Group B (control group), CCA findings were not confirmed by DU (n=34). Of the 1,650 individuals, 93 (5.63%) were detected to have CCA on PR. The population consisted of 43 males and 50 females with mean age of 59.84±10.92 years. No difference was determined in respect of CCA between the sexes (P=0.745). There was a significant difference between Group A and Group B in respect of hypertension (P=0.004). But there was no difference between Group A and Group B in respect of age (P=0.495), BMI (P=0.756), diabetes (P=0.168), and smoking (P=0.482) distribution. Although PR cannot be used as an initial diagnostic method when searching for CCA, dentists should be aware of CCA on a routine PR, particularly in older patients who may also have the risk factors of obesity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and smoking. Recognizing of CCA especially in hypertensive patients could potentially increase the length and quality of life for individuals.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 6%
Unknown 15 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 25%
Student > Bachelor 3 19%
Unspecified 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Other 1 6%
Other 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 69%
Unspecified 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Psychology 1 6%
Other 0 0%

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 09 July 2015.
All research outputs
#3,533,811
of 5,333,889 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#484
of 777 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,205
of 185,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#37
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,333,889 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 777 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 185,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.