↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Pyoderma gangrenosum: challenges and solutions

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
Title
Pyoderma gangrenosum: challenges and solutions
Published in
Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology, May 2015
DOI 10.2147/ccid.s61202
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana Gameiro, Neide Pereira, José Carlos Cardoso, Margarida Gonçalo

Abstract

Pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is a rare disease, but commonly related to important morbidity. PG was first assumed to be infectious, but is now considered an inflammatory neutrophilic disease, often associated with autoimmunity, and with chronic inflammatory and neoplastic diseases. Currently, many aspects of the underlying pathophysiology are not well understood, and etiology still remains unknown. PG presents as painful, single or multiple lesions, with several clinical variants, in different locations, with a non specific histology, which makes the diagnosis challenging and often delayed. In the classic ulcerative variant, characterized by ulcers with inflammatory undermined borders, a broad differential diagnosis of malignancy, infection, and vasculitis needs to be considered, making PG a diagnosis of exclusion. Moreover, there are no definitively accepted diagnostic criteria. Treatment is also challenging since, due to its rarity, clinical trials are difficult to perform, and consequently, there is no "gold standard" therapy. Patients frequently require aggressive immunosuppression, often in multidrug regimens that are not standardized. We reviewed the clinical challenges of PG in order to find helpful clues to improve diagnostic accuracy and the treatment options, namely topical care, systemic drugs, and the new emerging therapies that may reduce morbidity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Master 8 8%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 25 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 32 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 June 2015.
All research outputs
#16,188,873
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology
#496
of 900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,810
of 279,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology
#11
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 279,338 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.