↓ Skip to main content

Standardized food challenges are subject to variability in interpretation of clinical symptoms

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Allergy, November 2014
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 (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Standardized food challenges are subject to variability in interpretation of clinical symptoms
Published in
Clinical and Translational Allergy, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13601-014-0043-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francine C van Erp, André C Knulst, Yolanda Meijer, Carmelo Gabriele, Cornelis K van der Ent

Abstract

Food challenge tests are the gold standard in diagnosing food allergy. Guidelines provide scoring systems to classify symptoms during challenge and typically recommend that challenges are considered positive when objective symptoms occur. However, currently no standard criteria for the definition of a positive challenge outcome exists and interpretation of food challenges mainly depends on clinical judgment. This study aims to assess inter- and intra-observer variability in outcomes of routinely performed peanut challenges in children.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 32%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 9 26%

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 22 June 2016.
All research outputs
#2,170,322
of 12,443,702 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#163
of 367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,407
of 282,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#13
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,443,702 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 367 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 282,163 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.