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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A study of the effectiveness and side effects of salivation-inducers in patients with Sjögren’s syndrome ~ Comparison between cevimeline hydrochloride and pilocarpine hydrochloride ~
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Japanese Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.5794/jjoms.61.147 |
| Authors |
Shouichi SHINOZAKI, Masafumi MORIYAMA, Jun-Nosuke HAYASHIDA, Akihiko TANAKA, Takashi MAEHARA, Sachiko FURUKAWA, Miho OHTA, Yumi IMABAYASHI, Seiji NAKAMURA |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
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 28 October 2018.
All research outputs
#16,375,964
of 25,850,671 outputs
Outputs from Japanese Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
#63
of 93 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,994
of 362,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Japanese Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,850,671 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 93 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 362,097 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 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