↓ Skip to main content

Mechanisms of Disease of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Overview of attention for article published in Annual Review of Pathology: Mechanisms of Disease, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
guideline
2 clinical guideline sources

Readers on

mendeley
108 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.
Article details
Title
Mechanisms of Disease of Eosinophilic Esophagitis
Published in
Annual Review of Pathology: Mechanisms of Disease, February 2016
DOI 10.1146/annurev-pathol-012615-044241
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a recently recognized inflammatory disease of the esophagus with clinical symptoms derived from esophageal dysfunction. The etiology of EoE is now being elucidated, and food hypersensitivity is emerging as the central cornerstone of disease pathogenesis. Herein, we present a thorough picture of the current clinical, pathologic, and molecular understanding of the disease with a focus on disease mechanisms. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Pathology: Mechanisms of Disease Volume 11 is May 23, 2016. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/catalog/pubdates.aspx for revised estimates.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Master 9 8%
Other 24 22%
Unknown 26 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 37%
Immunology and Microbiology 10 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Chemical Engineering 2 2%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 36 33%
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 22 October 2024.
All research outputs
#4,792,185
of 32,375,021 outputs
Outputs from Annual Review of Pathology: Mechanisms of Disease
#143
of 332 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,696
of 328,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annual Review of Pathology: Mechanisms of Disease
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,375,021 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 332 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 328,440 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 63% of its contemporaries.