↓ Skip to main content

Anti-IgE therapy for allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis in people with cystic fibrosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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.
Title
Anti-IgE therapy for allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis in people with cystic fibrosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010288.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kana R Jat, Dinesh K Walia, Anju Khairwa

Abstract

Cystic fibrosis is an autosomal recessive multisystem disorder with an approximate prevalence of 1 in 3500 live births. Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis is a lung disease caused by aspergillus-induced hypersensitivity with a prevalence of 2% to 15% in people with cystic fibrosis. The mainstay of treatment includes corticosteroids and itraconazole. The treatment with corticosteroids for prolonged periods of time, or repeatedly for exacerbations of allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, may lead to many adverse effects. The monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, omalizumab, has improved asthma control in severely allergic asthmatics. The drug is given as a subcutaneous injection every two to four weeks. Since allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis is also a condition resulting from hypersensitivity to specific allergens, as in asthma, it may be a candidate for therapy using anti-IgE antibodies. Therefore, anti-IgE therapy, using agents like omalizumab, may be a potential therapy for allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis in people with cystic fibrosis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 25%
Other 4 17%
Student > Postgraduate 4 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 67%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Mathematics 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 1 4%

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 18 September 2013.
All research outputs
#6,208,738
of 10,479,368 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,696
of 9,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,443
of 144,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#89
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 10,479,368 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,032 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.1. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 144,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.