↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

The lupus band test in systemic lupus erythematosus patients

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
The lupus band test in systemic lupus erythematosus patients
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, January 2011
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s10145
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Reich, Katarzyna Marcinow, Rafal Bialynicki-Birula

Abstract

The lupus band test (LBT) is a diagnostic procedure that is used to detect deposits of immunoglobulins and complement components along the dermoepidermal junction in patients with lupus erythematosus (LE). The LBT is positive in about 70%-80% of sun-exposed non-lesional skin specimens obtained from patients with systemic LE (SLE), and in about 55% of SLE cases if sun-protected nonlesional skin is analyzed. In patients with cutaneous LE only, the lesional skin usually shows a positive LBT. The LBT helps in differentiating LE from other similar skin conditions and may also be helpful in making the diagnosis of SLE in subjects with no specific cutaneous lesions. Furthermore, a positive LBT may be applied as a prognostic parameter for LE patients. However, the correct interpretation of this test requires detailed knowledge of the site of the biopsy, deposit components, morphology and brightness of the immunofluorescent band, and other associated serologic findings, as well as the response to treatment. It must be emphasized that LBT is a laboratory procedure that should always be interpreted in conjunction with clinical findings and other serological and immunopathological parameters.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 10 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 15%
Student > Master 7 15%
Other 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 63%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Unknown 9 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 March 2021.
All research outputs
#4,566,523
of 18,873,384 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#198
of 1,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,651
of 137,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,873,384 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 137,952 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.