↓ Skip to main content

Impact of Jumihaidokuto (Shi-Wei-Bai-Du-Tang) on Treatment of Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: A Randomized Controlled Study

Overview of attention for article published in Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
Impact of Jumihaidokuto (Shi-Wei-Bai-Du-Tang) on Treatment of Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: A Randomized Controlled Study
Published in
Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11655-017-2950-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiroyuki Murota, Hiroaki Azukizawa, Ichiro Katayama

Abstract

To study the effect of Jumihaidokuto (Shi-Wei-Bai-Du-Tang, ) in the management of chronic spontaneous urticaria. A randomized two-arm, parallel group study was conducted to compare the effect of Jumihaidokuto (6 g daily) with a control for 8 weeks. Concomitant therapy (e.g., antihistamines) was continued. Twenty-one subjects with severe chronic urticaria were enrolled in this study. The primary treatment outcome was the severity score proposed by the Japanese Dermatological Association. Secondary outcomes were quality of life (Skindex-16), itch intensity (Visual Analogue Scale), and patients' subjective disability due to wheal or itch. After the subjects were randomly assigned to groups by block randomization, 10 received Jumihaidokuto, and 11 did not. All subjects had already taken antihistamines. Improvement was significant when comparing the severity score of the Jumihaidokuto group with that of the control group (P<0.01). Skindex-16 values for both groups gradually decreased in the same fashion. Concomitant use of Jumihaidokuto with antihistamine was more effective than antihistamine alone in the management of chronic idiopathic urticaria. (Trial Registration No. UMIN000007251).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 25%
Other 2 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Unknown 5 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 8%
Engineering 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,477,045
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine
#304
of 681 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,097
of 318,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 681 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 318,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.