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.

Background: Orthodontic treatments have evolved significantly, with clear aligners becoming increasingly popular due to their aesthetic appeal and ease of use. This study systematically reviewed the impact of clear aligners in the changes in the oral microbiota compared to traditional fixed appliances. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted using two databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and the PubMed search engine. The studies included were those published between 2010 and 2023, involving adults over 18 years using clear aligners and fixed appliances. The data on oral microbiota changes were extracted and analyzed. Results: The review included eight studies, highlighting the differences in microbial changes associated with clear aligners versus fixed appliances. Clear aligners were associated with fewer detrimental changes in the oral microbiota, potentially due to their removable nature allowing for better hygiene. Fixed appliances showed a tendency to harbor more pathogenic bacteria, which is likely due to their difficulty to clean. Conclusions: Clear aligners may offer a better alternative to fixed appliances in terms of maintaining a healthier oral microbiota. Their design and ease of hygiene contribute to less accumulation of pathogenic bacteria, showing a more positive impact on maintaining a balanced oral microbiota when compared to fixed appliances.