↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Calcium pyrophosphate crystal deposition disease: diagnosis and treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Open Access Rheumatology : Research and Reviews , May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#26 of 188)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
Title
Calcium pyrophosphate crystal deposition disease: diagnosis and treatment
Published in
Open Access Rheumatology : Research and Reviews , May 2014
DOI 10.2147/oarrr.s39039
Pubmed ID
Authors

José Luis Rosales-Alexander, Jerónimo Balsalobre Aznar, César Magro-Checa

Abstract

Calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate crystal deposition disease (CPPD) is an inflammatory arthritis produced by the deposition of calcium pyrophosphate (CPP) crystals in the synovium and periarticular soft tissues. It is the third most common inflammatory arthritis. Diagnosis is suspected on the basis of the clinical picture and radiographic/laboratory findings. The reference standard for the diagnosis of CPPD is based on the identification of CPP crystals in synovial fluid by light microscopy, compensated polarized light microscopy, or phase contrast microscopy. Most treatment approaches for CPPD are based upon clinical experience and not upon controlled trials. They range - depending on the subtype and the characteristics of symptoms - from no treatment to interleukin-1 blockade antibodies or specific therapy for an underlying disease. This review summarizes all we know so far about the diagnosis and management of CPPD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Student > Master 12 13%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 28 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 30 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 05 January 2022.
All research outputs
#3,173,175
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Open Access Rheumatology : Research and Reviews
#26
of 188 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,478
of 242,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open Access Rheumatology : Research and Reviews
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 188 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 242,530 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them