↓ Skip to main content

Is Allergen Immunotherapy in Children Disease Modifying? A Review of the Evidence

Overview of attention for article published in Current Allergy and Asthma Reports, July 2018
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 (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Is Allergen Immunotherapy in Children Disease Modifying? A Review of the Evidence
Published in
Current Allergy and Asthma Reports, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11882-018-0801-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amanda K. Rudman Spergel, Michael Minnicozzi, Lisa M. Wheatley, Alkis Togias

Abstract

Although evidence supports a beneficial effect of allergen immunotherapy on the symptoms of allergic respiratory disease and food allergy, it is not clear whether immunotherapy modifies the natural history of these conditions. In aeroallergen immunotherapy, studies suggest that prevention of asthma can be attained. Less evident is the ability of immunotherapy to prevent new allergen sensitizations and more studies are needed to test whether immunotherapy can continue suppressing airway symptoms after treatment discontinuation. In food allergen immunotherapy, there is evidence that unresponsiveness to a food challenge can be sustained in some treatment recipients, but little knowledge exists as to the dose and duration of treatment that can optimize this effect. Suggestive evidence exists that allergen immunotherapy can modify allergic disease in children, but definitive studies are lacking. More research in the field is required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 10%
Student > Master 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 9 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 10 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 26 October 2018.
All research outputs
#3,747,311
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Current Allergy and Asthma Reports
#148
of 810 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,683
of 326,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Allergy and Asthma Reports
#4
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 810 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 326,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.