↓ Skip to main content

Thrombotic risk assessment in antiphospholipid syndrome: the role of new antibody specificities and thrombin generation assay

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Molecular Allergy, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Thrombotic risk assessment in antiphospholipid syndrome: the role of new antibody specificities and thrombin generation assay
Published in
Clinical and Molecular Allergy, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12948-016-0043-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Savino Sciascia, Simone Baldovino, Karen Schreiber, Laura Solfietti, Massimo Radin, Maria J. Cuadrado, Elisa Menegatti, Doruk Erkan, Dario Roccatello

Abstract

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune condition characterized by the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) in subjects presenting with thrombosis and/or pregnancy loss. The currently used classification criteria were updated in the international consensus held in Sidney in 2005. Vascular events seem to result of local procoagulative alterations upon triggers influence (the so called "second-hit theory"), while placental thrombosis and complement activation seem to lead to pregnancy morbidity. The laboratory tests suggested by the current classification criteria include lupus anticoagulant, a functional coagulation assay, and anticardiolipin and anti-β2-glycoprotein-I antibodies, generally detected by solid phase enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The real challenge for treating physicians is understanding what is the actual weight of aPL in provoking clinical manifestations in each case. As thrombosis has a multi-factorial cause, each patient needs a risk-stratified approach. In this review we discuss the role of thrombotic risk assessment in primary and secondary prevention of venous and arterial thromboembolic disease in patients with APS, focusing on new antibody specificities, available risk scoring models and new coagulation assays.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 76 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 12 15%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 24 31%
Unknown 15 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Unspecified 4 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 22 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 July 2016.
All research outputs
#7,486,067
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Molecular Allergy
#119
of 214 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,931
of 355,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Molecular Allergy
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 214 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 355,956 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 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