↓ Skip to main content

Infection in Severe Asthma Exacerbations and Critical Asthma Syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Infection in Severe Asthma Exacerbations and Critical Asthma Syndrome
Published in
Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology, July 2014
DOI 10.1007/s12016-014-8435-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian E. Sandrock, Andrew Norris

Abstract

In chronic persistent asthma and severe acute exacerbations of bronchial asthma, infectious agents are the predominant triggers that drive disease and airway pathobiology. In acute exacerbations of bronchial asthma (AEBA) including near fatal and fatal asthma, viral agents, particularly human rhinovirus-C, respiratory syncytial virus and influenza A appear to be the more prevalent and recurring threats. Both viral, and to a lesser extent bacterial agents, can play a role, and co-infection may also be present and worsen prognosis in hospitalized patients, placing a portion at risk for critical asthma syndrome. During severe acute exacerbations, infectious agents must be treated empirically, but the initial treatment regimens can vary and viral coverage may also vary based on seasonality and patient age. Early treatment with ceftriaxone and azithromycin, along with oseltamivir in winter months, should be initiated with all cases of severe exacerbations where infection is suspected, and definitely in critical asthma syndrome until infection is excluded by appropriate diagnostic testing. In this manuscript we will outline the impact of the major viral agents on severe asthma including the data from the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. The role of bacterial infections in acute exacerbations of asthma will also be reviewed as well as the benefit of empiric antibiotics and the role of macrolides in both acute and chronic asthma.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 19%
Student > Master 16 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Researcher 8 8%
Other 7 7%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 24 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 39%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 27 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 October 2015.
All research outputs
#14,262,465
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology
#462
of 690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,240
of 231,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 690 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 231,286 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.