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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Gene expression analysis in allergology: the prediction of Hymenoptera venom allergy severity and treatment efficacy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Allergy, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2045-7022-3-35 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marek Niedoszytko, Marta Gruchała-Niedoszytko, Ewa Jassem |
| Abstract |
Insect venom allergy (IVA) may result in the most severe systemic reactions seen in allergology. The only potentially curative treatment option is venom immunotherapy (VIT) over 3 to 5 years. This treatment is effective in more than 90% of subjects but no reliable predictors of VIT effectiveness exist. Sting challenge with a living insect can be performed to assess the effectiveness of VIT: the predictive value of sting challenge can be highly sensitive in patients with honeybee venom allergy whereas in yellow jacket allergy, a negative result can be reliable if the challenge has been repeated at least 3 times.The analysis of gene expression may be a step towards personalized venom immunotherapy assessing the effectiveness of treatment, the minimal required time for VIT and the persistence of long term tolerance induced by the treatment. Recent studies have enabled construction of a predictive model that could potentially be used in clinical practice to assess the efficacy of insect venom immunotherapy. A set of 69 genes that may be responsible for long-term protection was identified. Further analysis of the previously identified 6 transcripts make up the 18 gene predictive peripheral blood showed differences in patients treated with IVA. Further studies are needed to investigate the usefulness of gene expression analysis and other markers in the prediction of VIT effectiveness. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 29% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 21% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 27 October 2013.
All research outputs
#6,741,089
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#365
of 756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,831
of 225,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 225,389 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.