↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

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 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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.

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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 26%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Student > Master 6 10%
Other 6 10%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 13 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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
#2,788,774
of 5,258,442 outputs
Outputs from Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology
#95
of 157 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,907
of 178,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology
#10
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,258,442 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 157 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 178,635 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.