↓ Skip to main content

Factors Promoting Development of Fibrosis in Crohn’s Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Factors Promoting Development of Fibrosis in Crohn’s Disease
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, July 2017
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2017.00096
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gerhard Rogler, Martin Hausmann

Abstract

The concepts on the pathophysiology of intestinal fibrosis in Crohn's disease (CD) have changed in recent years. Some years ago fibrosis was regarded to be a consequence of long-standing inflammation with subsequent destruction of the gut wall matrix followed by scar formation and collagen deposition. Fibrosis in CD patients appeared to be an irreversible process that could hardly be influenced. Therefore, the main target in CD therapy was to control inflammation to avoid fibrosis development. Many of these assumptions seem to be only partially true. Inflammation may be a necessary prerequisite for the initiation of fibrosis. However, when the pathophysiologic processes that lead to fibrosis in CD patients have been initiated fibrosis development may be independent of inflammation and may continue even when inflammation is under good medical control. Fibrosis in CD also may be reversible. After strictureplasty local collagen deposits decrease or even disappear. With new animal models for intestinal fibrosis on the horizon, we need to spend more efforts on understanding the factors influencing fibrosis in CD patients to finally find specific therapies. In this context, it will be as important to find markers and quantitative imaging tools to have reliable endpoints for clinical trials in fibrosing CD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 20%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 15 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 July 2017.
All research outputs
#18,559,907
of 22,986,950 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#3,975
of 5,749 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,507
of 313,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#58
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,986,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,749 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 313,004 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.