↓ Skip to main content

Altered gut microbiota in RA: implications for treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Zeitschrift für Rheumatologie, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Altered gut microbiota in RA: implications for treatment
Published in
Zeitschrift für Rheumatologie, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00393-016-0237-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Y. Kang, Y. Cai, X. Zhang, X. Kong, J. Su

Abstract

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease with progressive joint disorder. The complex interplay of genetic and environmental influences is important for the development of the disease. A growing body of evidence has shed light on the association of dysbiosis of gut microbiota with RA. Certain gut microbial strains have been shown to inhibit or attenuate immune responses in RA experimental models, suggesting that specific species among intestinal commensal bacteria may play either a pathogenic or a protective role in the development of RA. Oral intake of probiotics/prebiotics can therefore represent a therapeutic approach for RA treatment. However, the relevant scientific work has only just begun, and the available data in this field remain limited. Fortunately, utilization of new sequencing technologies allows expanded research on the association of intestinal bacterial flora and human diseases to be attempted. In this review, we summarize the role of gut microbiota in RA progression and address how specific bacterial strains regulate the immune response in disease process. Probiotics/prebiotics in the treatment of RA is also discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 2 14%
Lecturer 1 7%
Student > Master 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 7 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 2 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Unknown 7 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 March 2018.
All research outputs
#15,148,294
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Zeitschrift für Rheumatologie
#230
of 493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,801
of 418,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Zeitschrift für Rheumatologie
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 493 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 418,639 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.