↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacological Therapy of Osteoporosis: A Systematic Current Review of Literature

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
248 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
Pharmacological Therapy of Osteoporosis: A Systematic Current Review of Literature
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2017.00803
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vito Pavone, Gianluca Testa, Serena M. C. Giardina, Andrea Vescio, Domenico A. Restivo, Giuseppe Sessa

Abstract

Osteoporosis is the most common bone disease affecting millions of people worldwide, particularly in elderly or in post-menopausal women. The pathogenesis is useful to understand the possible mechanism of action of anti-osteoporotic drugs. Early diagnosis, possible with several laboratory and instrumental tests, allows a major accuracy in the choice of anti-osteoporosis drugs. Treatment of osteoporosis is strictly related to severity of pathology and consists on prevention of fragility fractures with a correct lifestyle and adequate nutritional supplements, and use of pharmacological therapy, started in patients with osteopenia and history of fragility fracture of the hip or spine. The purpose of this review is to focus on main current pharmacological products to treat osteoporotic patients.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 248 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 37 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 14%
Researcher 16 6%
Student > Master 15 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 6%
Other 28 11%
Unknown 103 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 21 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 4%
Other 21 8%
Unknown 113 46%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 November 2017.
All research outputs
#18,576,001
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#8,364
of 16,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,908
of 331,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#143
of 282 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,313 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 331,365 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 282 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.