↓ Skip to main content

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: protocol for a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Allergy, March 2016
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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis: protocol for a systematic review
Published in
Clinical and Translational Allergy, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13601-016-0099-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sangeeta Dhami, Ulugbek Nurmatov, Graham Roberts, Oliver Pfaar, Antonella Muraro, Ignacio J. Ansotegui, Moises Calderon, Cemal Cingi, Pascal Demoly, Stephen Durham, Ronald Gerth van Wijk, Susanne Halken, Eckard Hamelmann, Peter Hellings, Lars Jacobsen, Edward Knol, Desiree Larenas Linnemann, Sandra Lin, Vivian Maggina, Hanneke Oude-Elberink, Giovanni Pajno, Ruby Panwankar, Elideanna Pastorello, Constantinos Pitsios, Giuseppina Rotiroti, Frans Timmermans, Olympia Tsilochristou, Eva-Maria Varga, Jamie Wilkinson, Andrew Williams, Margitta Worm, Luo Zhang, Aziz Sheikh

Abstract

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing the EAACI Guidelines for Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for the Management of Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis. We seek to critically assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of AIT in the management of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. We will undertake a systematic review, which will involve searching international biomedical databases for published, in progress and unpublished evidence. Studies will be independently screened against pre-defined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using established instruments. Data will be descriptively and, if possible and appropriate, quantitatively synthesised. The findings from this review will be used to inform the development of recommendations for EAACI's Guidelines on AIT.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 23%
Student > Master 5 23%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Professor 2 9%
Other 4 18%
Unknown 2 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 45%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 4 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 30 March 2016.
All research outputs
#856,344
of 11,403,539 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#60
of 339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,867
of 287,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,403,539 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 339 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 287,459 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.