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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
BK polyomavirus in Kidney transplant recipients: screening, monitoring and clinical management
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Jornal Brasileiro de Nefrologia, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.5935/0101-2800.20140075 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rafael Brandão Varella, Jorge Reis Almeida, Patrícia de Fátima Lopes, Jorge Paulo Strogoff de Matos, Paulo Menezes, Jocemir Ronaldo Lugon |
| Abstract |
BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) is a causal agent of nephropathy, ureteral stenosis and hemorrhagic cystitis in kidney transplant recipients, and is considered an important emerging disease in transplantation. Regular screening for BKPyV reactivation mainly during the first 2 years posttransplant, with subsequent pre-emptive reduction of immunosuppression is considered the best option to avoid disease progression, since successful clearance or reduction of viremia is achieved in the vast majority of patients within 6 months. The use of drugs with antiviral properties for patients with persistent viremia has been attempted despite unclear benefits. Clinical manifestations of BKPyV nephropathy, current strategies for diagnosis and monitoring of BKPyV infection, management of immunosuppressive regimen after detection of BKPyV reactivation and the use of antiviral drugs are discussed in this review. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 March 2017.
All research outputs
#4,619,446
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Jornal Brasileiro de Nefrologia
#28
of 364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,734
of 319,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal Brasileiro de Nefrologia
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 364 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 319,281 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.