↓ Skip to main content

Cutting Edge Issues in Rheumatic Fever

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology, May 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
Cutting Edge Issues in Rheumatic Fever
Published in
Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology, May 2011
DOI 10.1007/s12016-011-8271-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher Chang

Abstract

Although the incidence of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease has decreased significantly in regions of the world where antibiotics are easily accessible, there remains a high incidence in developing nations as well as in certain regions where there is a high incidence of genetic susceptibility. These diseases are a function of poverty, low socioeconomic status, and barriers to healthcare access, and it is in the developing world that a comprehensive prevention program is most critically needed. Development of group A streptococcal vaccines has been under investigation since the 1960s and 50 years later, we still have no vaccine. Factors that contribute to this lack of success include a potential risk for developing vaccine-induced rheumatic heart disease, as well as difficulties in covering the many serological subtypes of M protein, a virulence factor found on the surface of the bacterium. Yet, development of a successful vaccine program for prevention of group A streptococcal infection still offers the best chance for eradication of rheumatic fever in the twenty-first century. Other useful approaches include continuation of primary and secondary prevention with antibiotics and implementation of health care policies that provide patients with easy access to antibiotics. Improved living conditions and better hygiene are also critical to the prevention of the spread of group A streptococcus, especially in impoverished regions of the world. The purpose of this article is to discuss current and recent developments in the diagnosis, pathogenesis, and management of rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 2 2%
United States 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 79 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 24%
Researcher 16 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 7 8%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 11 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 17%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 10 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 March 2012.
All research outputs
#16,272,032
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology
#525
of 690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,741
of 114,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 114,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.