↓ Skip to main content

ICON: chronic rhinosinusitis

Overview of attention for article published in World Allergy Organization Journal, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

7 tweeters
2 Facebook pages
1 video uploader


98 Dimensions

Readers on

161 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.
ICON: chronic rhinosinusitis
Published in
World Allergy Organization Journal, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1939-4551-7-25
Pubmed ID

Claus Bachert, Ruby Pawankar, Luo Zhang, Chaweewan Bunnag, Wytske J Fokkens, Daniel L Hamilos, Orathai Jirapongsananuruk, Robert Kern, Eli O Meltzer, Joaquim Mullol, Robert Naclerio, Renata Pilan, Chae-Seo Rhee, Harumi Suzaki, Richard Voegels, Michael Blaiss


Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a public health problem that has a significant socio-economic impact. Moreover, the complexity of this disease due to its heterogeneous nature based on the underlying pathophysiology - leading to different disease variants - further complicates our understanding and directions for the most appropriate targeted treatment strategies. Several International/national guidelines/position papers and/or consensus documents are available that present the current knowledge and treatment strategies for CRS. Yet there are many challenges to the management of CRS especially in the case of the more severe and refractory forms of disease. Therefore, the International Collaboration in Asthma, Allergy and Immunology (iCAALL), a collaboration between EAACI, AAAAI, ACAAI, and WAO, has decided to propose an International Consensus (ICON) on Chronic Rhinosinusitis. The purpose of this ICON on CRS is to highlight the key common messages from the existing guidelines, the differences in recommendations as well as the gaps in our current knowledge of CRS, thus providing a concise reference. In this document we discuss the definition of the disease, its relevance, pharmacoeconomics, pathophysiology, phenotypes and endotypes, genetics and risk factors, natural history and co-morbidities as well as clinical manifestations and treatment options in both adults and children comprising pharmacotherapy, surgical interventions and more recent biological approaches. Finally, we have also highlighted the unmet needs that wait to be addressed through future research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 161 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Italy 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 156 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 28 17%
Researcher 25 16%
Student > Master 17 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 9%
Other 12 7%
Other 40 25%
Unknown 24 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 84 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Other 13 8%
Unknown 34 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 August 2017.
All research outputs
of 14,780,886 outputs
Outputs from World Allergy Organization Journal
of 567 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 232,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Allergy Organization Journal
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,780,886 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 567 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 232,532 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them