↓ Skip to main content

Clinical pharmacology of gold

Overview of attention for article published in Inflammopharmacology, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#40 of 562)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
patent
11 patents
wikipedia
9 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
131 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
Title
Clinical pharmacology of gold
Published in
Inflammopharmacology, June 2008
DOI 10.1007/s10787-007-0021-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

W. F. Kean, I. R. L. Kean

Abstract

Since the dawn of civilization, elemental gold and gold compounds have been revered and utilized by Shamen and medical practitioners alike for many varied pathological problems. In the 20(th) century following the observations of Jacques Forestier, injectable gold compounds were successfully used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Of the many compounds developed, gold sodium thiomalate has been the most extensively studied by basic scientists and by clinicians. In the1980s, the oral gold compound auranofin showed promise as a therapeutic contender to injectable gold, but the clinical side effect profile and fear of long term effects of immune suppression by auranofin, resulted in gold sodium thiomalate continuing as the preferred gold compound for rheumatoid treatment. However, the increased use and demonstration of effectiveness of low dose Methotrexate (MTX) in rheumatoid treatment over the last 20 years has resulted in a significant decline in the use of injectable gold sodium thiomalate, this despite the claims and evidence that it remains a useful agent in the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Several authors still contend that the injectable gold compounds can still play a valuable role, and indeed may be the correct first choice in the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Unknown 99 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 26%
Researcher 18 18%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 17 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 18 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 8%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 21 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,538,990
of 23,402,852 outputs
Outputs from Inflammopharmacology
#40
of 562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,648
of 83,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Inflammopharmacology
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,402,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 562 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 83,491 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them