↓ Skip to main content

EULAR points to consider for the definition of clinical and imaging features suspicious for progression from psoriasis to psoriatic arthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, June 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
13 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
67 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
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.
Title
EULAR points to consider for the definition of clinical and imaging features suspicious for progression from psoriasis to psoriatic arthritis
Published in
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, June 2023
DOI 10.1136/ard-2023-224148
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alen Zabotti, Gabriele De Marco, Laure Gossec, Xenofon Baraliakos, Daniel Aletaha, Annamaria Iagnocco, Paolo Gisondi, Peter V Balint, Heidi Bertheussen, Wolf-Henning Boehncke, Nemanja S Damjanov, Maarten de Wit, Enzo Errichetti, Helena Marzo-Ortega, Mikhail Protopopov, Lluis Puig, Rubén Queiro, Piero Ruscitti, Laura Savage, Georg Schett, Stefan Siebert, Tanja A Stamm, Paul Studenic, Ilaria Tinazzi, Filip E Van den Bosch, Annette van der Helm-van Mil, Abdulla Watad, Josef S Smolen, Dennis G McGonagle

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 67 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Lecturer 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 23 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 23%
Unspecified 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 21 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 139. 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 11 July 2024.
All research outputs
#320,658
of 26,626,316 outputs
Outputs from Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
#112
of 7,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,982
of 397,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
#4
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,626,316 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 397,403 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.