↓ Skip to main content

Chemical Peels: What's New and What Isn't New but Still Works Well

Overview of attention for article published in Facial Plastic Surgery, December 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
70 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.
Article details
Title
Chemical Peels: What's New and What Isn't New but Still Works Well
Published in
Facial Plastic Surgery, December 2009
DOI 10.1055/s-0029-1243082
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Chemical peeling is becoming increasingly popular for the treatment of skin rejuvenation where it can improve damaged skin and fine wrinkles. The basic procedure aims at obtaining a controlled chemical burn of the epidermis and/or dermis. This results in epidermal regeneration and postinflammatory collagen neoformation with remodeling of collagen and elastic fibers and deposition of glycosaminoglycans in the dermis. Various chemicals have been used as peeling agents, of which the most used are the alpha-hydroxy acids, such as glycolic acid, or beta-hydroxy acids, such as salicylic acid. The choice of the compound is linked to the different indications and to the depth of the desired peeling. Phenol is still the best agent for deep peeling but requires specific indications, prescription, and post-peeling care. Combination of different compounds is one innovation in the field of chemical peelings. Further controlled studies are necessary to set up specific guidelines.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 68 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 11 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Master 6 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 31%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 22 31%
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 29 April 2013.
All research outputs
#28,604,603
of 34,364,397 outputs
Outputs from Facial Plastic Surgery
#400
of 693 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#217,573
of 233,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Facial Plastic Surgery
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,364,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 693 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 233,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.