↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Interventions for erosive lichen planus affecting mucosal sites

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
113 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
286 Mendeley
Title
Interventions for erosive lichen planus affecting mucosal sites
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008092.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suzanne Cheng, Gudula Kirtschig, Susan Cooper, Martin Thornhill, Jo Leonardi‐Bee, Ruth Murphy

Abstract

Erosive lichen planus (ELP) affecting mucosal surfaces is a chronic autoimmune disease of unknown aetiology. It is often more painful and debilitating than the non-erosive types of lichen planus. Treatment is difficult and aimed at palliation rather than cure. Several topical and systemic agents have been used with varying results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 286 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Unknown 284 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 44 15%
Student > Bachelor 31 11%
Researcher 29 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 8%
Student > Postgraduate 14 5%
Other 51 18%
Unknown 95 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 116 41%
Psychology 15 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 5%
Social Sciences 8 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 24 8%
Unknown 104 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 February 2023.
All research outputs
#7,077,903
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,164
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,043
of 258,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#112
of 205 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
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 is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 well, scoring higher than 76% 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 is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.