↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Cyclic vomiting syndrome: diagnostic approach and current management strategies

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, February 2018
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 (#46 of 323)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Cyclic vomiting syndrome: diagnostic approach and current management strategies
Published in
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, February 2018
DOI 10.2147/ceg.s136420
Pubmed ID
Authors

William J Hayes, Deidra VanGilder, Joseph Berendse, Michael D Lemon, John A Kappes

Abstract

Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) is a disorder characterized by episodes of nausea and vomiting lasting for 1-5 days followed by asymptomatic periods. The etiology of CVS is unknown, but it shares similar characteristics to migraine headaches. CVS is generally classified as having four phases: prodromal, acute/vomiting/hyperemesis, recovery, and remission/interepisodic. Current management strategies include trigger avoidance, abortive and prophylactic medication therapies, and supportive care. The goal of therapy for the remission phase is prophylaxis of further episodes. Antidepressant, antiepileptic, and antimigraine medications show an overall reduction or remission of CVS symptoms in more than 70% of patients. This article provides a summary of diagnostic strategies and reviews current management strategies for CVS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 13 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 13%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 12 19%
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 16 April 2024.
All research outputs
#3,099,634
of 24,694,993 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#46
of 323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,888
of 449,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,694,993 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 323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. 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 449,960 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.