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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Efficacy and safety of Jianzhong decoction in treating peptic ulcers: a meta-analysis of 58 randomised controlled trials with 5192 patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12906-017-1723-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yan Sun, Jinping Zhang, Yuanyuan Chen |
| Abstract |
Jianzhong decoction is widely used to treat peptic ulcers; however, due to lack of systematic evaluations, its clinical efficacy remains controversial. We performed meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Jianzhong decoction in treating peptic ulcers. Studies were systematically retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, Chongqing VIP, China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc), and references cited in related studies/reviews. Extracted data included the total effective rate, helicobacter pylori eradication rates, recurrence rate, and adverse reaction rate. Fifty-eight randomised controlled trials involving 5192 patients were included in the final analysis. Results showed that Jianzhong decoction therapy was more effective than conventional Western medicine therapy (total effective rate, odds ratio [OR] = 4.29, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.51-5.23, P = 0.000; helicobacter pylori eradication rates, OR =2.10, 95% CI: 1.69-2.61, P = 0.000; recurrence rate, OR =0.23, 95% CI: 0.18-0.29, P = 0.000; and adverse reaction rate, OR =0.20, 95% CI: 0.12-0.33, P = 0.000). Jianzhong decoction increased the total effective rate and helicobacter pylori eradication rate, and lowered the recurrence and adverse reaction rates. The results of this study can be used as a guide for clinical treatment of peptic ulcers. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 29% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 18% |
| Unknown | 4 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 43% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
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 11 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,420,242
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#2,986
of 3,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,161
of 308,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#104
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,639 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 308,976 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.