Background To describe the impact of research, beyond the limits of the academic environment, Altmetric, a new social and traditional media metric was proposed. The aims of this study were to analyze the online activity related to orthodontic research via Altmetric and to assess if a correlation exists among citations, Mendeley reader count, and the AAS (Altmetric Attention Score). Method The Dimensions App was searched for articles published in the orthodontic journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) throughout the years 2014 to 2018. The articles with a positive AAS were collected and screened for data related to publication and authorship. The articles with an AAS higher than 5 were screened for research topic and study design. Citation counts were harvested from Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus. Results The best performing journals were Progress in Orthodontics and the European Journal of Orthodontics with a mean AAS per published item of 1.455 and 1.351, respectively and the most prevalent sources were Tweets and Facebook mentions. The most prevalent topic was Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQOL) and the study design was systematic reviews. The correlation between the AAS and the citations in both WOS and Scopus was poor (r = 0.1463 and r = 0.1508, p < .05). The correlation between citations count and Mendeley reader (r = 0.6879 and r = 0.697, p < .05) was moderate. Conclusions Few journals displayed a high level of web activity. Journals and editors should enhance online dissemination of the scientific outputs. The authors should report the impact of the findings to the general public in a convenient way to facilitate online dissemination but to avoid an opportunistic use of the research outputs. Despite the lack of correlation, a combination of the citation count and the AAS can give a more comprehensive assessment of research impact.

No abstract

Background: The precision of bracket manufacturing is fundamental to ensure the correct expression of the inbuilt information. The objective of this study was to determine the actual tip and torque values of a pool of stainless steel brackets, pre-adjusted according to the MBT prescription values, and to compare these actual values with those stated by the manufacturers in order to test their compliance with the tolerance limits reported in the ISO 27020:2019 Methods: A sample of 360 stainless steel brackets, from 12 different providers, were evaluated. All brackets had a nominal slot size of 0.022 in., belonged to the upper right central incisor, and were manufactured with the metal injection molding technique (MIM). For each provider, three different batches of the same bracket series were tested. A single-blind design was used for bracket coding. Results: Only five systems displayed torque mean values that matched the declared values (p > 0.05). Only one system did not respect the tolerance limits established in the ISO 27020:2019 norm. The tip values were different from those declared in seven of the assessed systems; however, none exceeded the tolerance limits. The inter-batch variability in most cases was not statistically significant. Conclusions: In most of the assessed systems, there can be a difference between the actual and the declared torque values, while tip information is usually accurately incorporated into the bracket slot. Lack of precision in the manufacturing process can reduce the efficacy of the appliance and force the clinician to compensate for dimensional inaccuracy through wire bending.