↓ Skip to main content

Clinical efficacy of a topical lactic acid bacterial microbiome in chronic rhinosinusitis: A randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
Clinical efficacy of a topical lactic acid bacterial microbiome in chronic rhinosinusitis: A randomized controlled trial
Published in
Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology, November 2017
DOI 10.1002/lio2.93
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anders Mårtensson, Milad Abolhalaj, Malin Lindstedt, Anette Mårtensson, Tobias C. Olofsson, Alejandra Vásquez, Lennart Greiff, Anders Cervin

Abstract

A locally disturbed commensal microbiome might be an etiological factor in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in general and in CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP) in particular. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) have been suggested to restore commensal microbiomes. A honeybee LAB microbiome consisting of various lactobacilli and bifidobacteria have been found potent against CRS pathogens in vitro. Recently, we examined effects of single nasal administrations of this microbiome in healthy subjects and found it inert. In this study, we examined effects of repeated such administrations in patients with CRSsNP. The study was of a randomized, double-blinded, crossover, and sham-controlled design. Twenty patients received 2 weeks' treatment administered using a nasal spray-device. The subjects were monitored with regard to symptoms (SNOT-22 questionnaire, i.e., the primary efficacy variable), changes to their microbiome, and inflammatory products (IL-6, IL-8, TNF-, IL-8,a, and MPO) in nasal lavage fluids. Neither symptom scores, microbiological explorations, nor levels of inflammatory products in nasal lavage fluids were affected by LAB (c.f. sham). Two weeks' nasal administration of a honeybee LAB microbiome to patients with CRSsNP is well tolerated but affects neither symptom severity nor the microbiological flora/local inflammatory activity. 1b.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 13 18%
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Researcher 5 7%
Professor 4 5%
Student > Master 4 5%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 22 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 19%
Unspecified 13 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 20 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 02 February 2023.
All research outputs
#6,277,581
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
#106
of 926 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,838
of 342,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 926 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 342,685 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.