↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Diagnosis and management of xerostomia and hyposalivation

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 1,126)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
8 tweeters
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
145 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
407 Mendeley
Title
Diagnosis and management of xerostomia and hyposalivation
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, December 2014
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s76282
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessandro Villa, Christopher Connell, Silvio Abati

Abstract

Xerostomia, the subjective complaint of dry mouth, and hyposalivation remain a significant burden for many individuals. Diagnosis of xerostomia and salivary gland hypofunction is dependent upon a careful and detailed history and thorough oral examination. There exist many options for treatment and symptom management: salivary stimulants, topical agents, saliva substitutes, and systemic sialogogues. The aim of this review is to investigate the current state of knowledge on management and treatment of patients affected by xerostomia and/or hyposalivation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 407 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Unknown 406 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 100 25%
Student > Master 74 18%
Student > Postgraduate 39 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 6%
Other 62 15%
Unknown 83 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 224 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 3%
Other 23 6%
Unknown 98 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. 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 07 January 2021.
All research outputs
#545,895
of 18,144,179 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#22
of 1,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,497
of 223,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,144,179 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,126 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 223,875 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 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