| Title |
Dietary supplements for established atopic eczema
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd005205.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fiona J Bath‐Hextall, Claire Jenkinson, Rosemary Humphreys, Hywel C Williams |
| Abstract |
Many people with atopic eczema are reluctant to use the most commonly recommended treatments because they fear the long-term health effects. As a result, many turn to dietary supplements as a possible treatment approach, often with the belief that some essential ingredient is 'missing' in their diet. Various supplements have been proposed, but it is unclear whether any of these interventions are effective. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 States | 3 | 21% |
| France | 2 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 14% |
| Australia | 2 | 14% |
| Argentina | 1 | 7% |
| Japan | 1 | 7% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 21% |
| Scientists | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 363 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 357 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 76 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 42 | 12% |
| Researcher | 38 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 25 | 7% |
| Other | 76 | 21% |
| Unknown | 71 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 140 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 39 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 7% |
| Psychology | 13 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 55 | 15% |
| Unknown | 80 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. 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 25 October 2021.
All research outputs
#673,217
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,242
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,923
of 258,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#13
of 205 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 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 258,519 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 205 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.