| Title |
Chinese herbal medicine for atopic eczema
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008642.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sherman Gu, Angela WH Yang, Charlie CL Xue, Chun G Li, Carmen Pang, Weiya Zhang, Hywel C Williams |
| Abstract |
Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has been increasingly used for atopic eczema. A previous version of this Cochrane review published in 2004 found some evidence of a possible benefit for oral ingestion of CHM for eczema, but the results were inconclusive and the evidence needs to be updated. We have expanded the scope of this review to include an assessment of the topical and oral effects of CHM for eczema. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 11% |
| Australia | 2 | 11% |
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| France | 1 | 6% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 11 | 61% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 78% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 206 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 203 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 30 | 15% |
| Researcher | 17 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 8% |
| Other | 35 | 17% |
| Unknown | 59 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 81 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 8% |
| Unknown | 66 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 04 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,808,005
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,876
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,674
of 210,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#88
of 241 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 210,964 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 241 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 63% of its contemporaries.