↓ Skip to main content

Applying the phenotype approach for rosacea to practice and research

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Dermatology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Applying the phenotype approach for rosacea to practice and research
Published in
British Journal of Dermatology, July 2018
DOI 10.1111/bjd.16815
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Tan, M. Berg, R.L. Gallo, J.Q. Del Rosso

Abstract

Rosacea diagnosis and classification have evolved since the 2002 National Rosacea Society (NRS) expert panel subtype approach. Several working groups are now aligned to a more patient-centric phenotype approach, based on an individual's presenting signs and symptoms. However, subtyping is still commonplace across the field and an integrated approach is required to ensure widespread progression to the phenotype approach. To provide practical recommendations that facilitate adoption of a phenotype approach across the rosacea field. Through a review of the literature and consolidation of rosacea expert experience, we identify challenges to implementing a phenotype approach in rosacea and offer practical recommendations to overcome them across clinical practice, interventional research, epidemiological research and basic science. These practical recommendations are intended to indicate the next steps in the progression from subtyping to a phenotyping approach in rosacea, with the goals of improving our understanding of the disease, facilitating treatment developments, and ultimately improving care for patients with rosacea. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 12 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 38%
Unspecified 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 12 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 09 December 2020.
All research outputs
#2,761,243
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Dermatology
#986
of 9,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,757
of 323,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Dermatology
#16
of 173 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,663 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 323,052 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 173 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 90% of its contemporaries.