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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effects of Chinese herbal formula Erxian decoction for treating osteoporosis: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s117597 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jin-Yu Li, Yu-Song Jia, Li-Min Chai, Xiao-Hong Mu, Sheng Ma, Lin Xu, Xu Wei |
| Abstract |
The aim is to systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbal formula Erxian decoction (EXD) for treating osteoporosis. Six databases were searched from inception through September 17, 2016, without language restriction. All randomized controlled trials of EXD for osteoporosis were included. One or more outcome measures including fracture, change in bone mineral density (BMD), pain symptom improvement, bone biochemical markers, quality of life, adverse event or adverse drug reaction were evaluated. Study selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and data analyses were conducted according to Cochrane standards. Eight trials including 644 patients investigated the effects of EXD in the treatment of osteoporosis. The methodological quality of the included trials was generally low. The meta-analysis from two trials showed favorable effects of EXD in improving BMD of lumbar spine (mean difference [MD]: 0.05 [0.03, 0.06]; I(2)=0%; P<0.00001) and BMD of femoral great trochanter (MD: 0.06 [0.02, 0.10]; I(2)=59%; P=0.005) compared with caltrate tablets. The other meta-analysis from two trials showed beneficial effects of EXD plus caltrate tablets and calcitriol in improving BMD of femoral neck (MD: 0.04 [0.00, 0.09]; I(2)=56%; P=0.04), the level of calcium (MD: 0.20 [0.15, 0.24]; I(2)=0%; P<0.00001), and phosphorus (MD: -0.28 [-0.39, -0.17]; I(2)=68%; P<0.00001) compared with caltrate tablets and calcitriol alone. The adverse drug reactions of EXD were mainly slight gastrointestinal symptoms. The study provides suggestive evidence of the superiority of EXD monotherapy or combination therapy over basic supplements for treating osteoporosis. However, the evidence remains weak. More rigorously designed and measured, randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials with larger sample size are needed to verify the current conclusions. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 16% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 February 2017.
All research outputs
#14,731,975
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#932
of 1,962 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,684
of 422,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#26
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,962 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 422,901 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.