| Title |
Antibiotic prescribing practices by dentists: a review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, June 2010
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s9736 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Najla Saeed Dar-Odeh, Osama Abdalla Abu-Hammad, Mahmoud Khaled Al-Omiri, Ameen Sameh Khraisat, Asem Ata Shehabi |
| Abstract |
Antibiotics are prescribed by dentists for treatment as well as prevention of infection. Indications for the use of systemic antibiotics in dentistry are limited, since most dental and periodontal diseases are best managed by operative intervention and oral hygiene measures. However, the literature provides evidence of inadequate prescribing practices by dentists, due to a number of factors ranging from inadequate knowledge to social factors. Here we review studies that investigated the pattern of antibiotic use by dentists worldwide. The main defects in the knowledge of antibiotic prescribing are outlined. The main conclusion is that, unfortunately, the prescribing practices of dentists are inadequate and this is manifested by over-prescribing. Recommendations to improve antibiotic prescribing practices are presented in an attempt to curb the increasing incidence of antibiotic resistance and other side effects of antibiotic abuse. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 3 | 38% |
| United States | 2 | 25% |
| Philippines | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 281 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 279 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 53 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 44 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 22 | 8% |
| Researcher | 20 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 6% |
| Other | 64 | 23% |
| Unknown | 60 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 157 | 56% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 24 | 9% |
| Unknown | 63 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 10 March 2021.
All research outputs
#2,481,484
of 25,701,027 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#112
of 1,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,012
of 105,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,701,027 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,322 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 105,934 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
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