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 |
The diagnosis of food allergy: protocol for a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Allergy, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2045-7022-3-18 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karla Soares‐Weiser, Sukhmeet S Panesar, Tamara Rader, Yemisi Takwoingi, Thomas Werfel, Antonella Muraro, Karin Hoffmann‐Sommergruber, Graham Roberts, Aziz Sheikh, the EAACI Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Group |
| Abstract |
The literature on diagnostic tests for food allergy currently lacks clear consensus regarding the accuracy and safety of different investigative approaches. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology is in the process of developing its Guideline for Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis, and this systematic review is one of seven inter-linked evidence syntheses that are being undertaken in order to provide a state-of-the-art synopsis of the current evidence base in relation to epidemiology, prevention, diagnosis and clinical management, and impact on quality of life, which will be used to inform the formulation of clinical recommendations. The aim of this systematic review will be to assess the diagnostic accuracy of tests aimed at supporting the clinical diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergy. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 20% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 10 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 52% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 11 | 24% |
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 08 June 2013.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#600
of 756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,943
of 209,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 209,841 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.