↓ Skip to main content

Narrow-band ultraviolet B phototherapy versus broad-band ultraviolet B or psoralen-ultraviolet A photochemotherapy for psoriasis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
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 (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
Narrow-band ultraviolet B phototherapy versus broad-band ultraviolet B or psoralen-ultraviolet A photochemotherapy for psoriasis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009481.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaomei Chen, Ming Yang, Yan Cheng, Guan J Liu, Min Zhang

Abstract

The most commonly used types of phototherapy for treating psoriasis are narrow-band ultraviolet B (NB-UVB); broad-band ultraviolet B (BB-UVB), which includes selective (delivering radiation with a wavelength range of 305 to 325 nm) and conventional BB-UVB (280 to 320 nm); and psoralen ultraviolet A photochemotherapy (oral or bath PUVA). There is substantial controversy regarding their efficacy when compared with each other.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 22%
Unspecified 15 14%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Other 33 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 62%
Unspecified 21 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 11 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#1,630,073
of 13,216,344 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,354
of 10,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,255
of 181,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#39
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,216,344 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,529 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 181,086 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.