↓ Skip to main content

Gene therapy of the rheumatic diseases: 1998 to 2008

Overview of attention for article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy, January 2009
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
7 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Gene therapy of the rheumatic diseases: 1998 to 2008
Published in
Arthritis Research & Therapy, January 2009
DOI 10.1186/ar2563
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher H Evans, Steven C Ghivizzani, Paul D Robbins

Abstract

During the decade since the launch of Arthritis Research, the application of gene therapy to the rheumatic diseases has experienced the same vicissitudes as the field of gene therapy as a whole. There have been conceptual and technological advances and an increase in the number of clinical trials. However, funding has been unreliable and a small number of high-profile deaths in human trials, including one in an arthritis gene therapy trial, have provided ammunition to skeptics. Nevertheless, steady progress has been made in a number of applications, including rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis, Sjögren syndrome, and lupus. Clinical trials in rheumatoid arthritis have progressed to phase II and have provided the first glimpses of possible efficacy. Two phase I protocols for osteoarthritis are under way. Proof of principle has been demonstrated in animal models of Sjögren syndrome and lupus. For certain indications, the major technological barriers to the development of genetic therapies seem to have been largely overcome. The translational research necessary to turn these advances into effective genetic medicines requires sustained funding and continuity of effort.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 27%
Researcher 12 20%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Professor 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 8 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 41%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 27%
Engineering 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 6 10%
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 28 December 2021.
All research outputs
#3,798,945
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#902
of 3,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,527
of 186,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#2
of 25 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 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 186,036 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 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 92% of its contemporaries.