↓ Skip to main content

Kidney retransplantation in children following rejection and recurrent disease

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Nephrology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Kidney retransplantation in children following rejection and recurrent disease
Published in
Pediatric Nephrology, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00467-016-3346-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca C. Graves, Richard N. Fine

Abstract

Retransplantation accounts for approximately 15 % of the annual transplants performed in the USA, and in the recent International Collaborative Transplant Study report on pediatric patients 15.2 % of the 9209 patients included in the report were retransplant recipients. Although the significant advances in clinical management and newer immunosuppressive agents have had a significant impact on improving short-term allograft function, it is apparent that long-term allograft function remains suboptimal. Therefore, it is likely that the majority of pediatric renal allograft recipients will require one or more retransplants during their lifetime. Unfortunately, a second or subsequent graft in pediatric recipients has inferior long-term graft survival rates compared to initial grafts, with decreasing rates with each subsequent graft. Multiple issues influence the outcome of retransplantation, with the most significant being the cause of the prior transplant failure. Non-adherence-associated graft loss poses unresolved ethical issues that may impact access to retransplantation. Graft nephrectomy prior to retransplantation may benefit selected patients, but the impact of an in situ failed graft on the development of panel-reactive antibodies remains to be definitively determined. It is important that these and other factors discussed in this review be taken into consideration during the counseling of families on the optimal approach for their child who requires a retransplant.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 8 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 48%
Psychology 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Unknown 10 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 30 June 2016.
All research outputs
#7,232,713
of 22,860,626 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Nephrology
#1,409
of 3,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,241
of 300,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Nephrology
#18
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,860,626 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,551 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 300,859 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.