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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Paving the way for predictive diagnostics and personalized treatment of invasive aspergillosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Microbiology, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00411 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ana Oliveira-Coelho, Fernando Rodrigues, António Campos, João F. Lacerda, Agostinho Carvalho, Cristina Cunha |
| Abstract |
Invasive aspergillosis (IA) is a life-threatening fungal disease commonly diagnosed among individuals with immunological deficits, namely hematological patients undergoing chemotherapy or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Vaccines are not available, and despite the improved diagnosis and antifungal therapy, the treatment of IA is associated with a poor outcome. Importantly, the risk of infection and its clinical outcome vary significantly even among patients with similar predisposing clinical factors and microbiological exposure. Recent insights into antifungal immunity have further highlighted the complexity of host-fungus interactions and the multiple pathogen-sensing systems activated to control infection. How to decode this information into clinical practice remains however, a challenging issue in medical mycology. Here, we address recent advances in our understanding of the host-fungus interaction and discuss the application of this knowledge in potential strategies with the aim of moving toward personalized diagnostics and treatment (theranostics) in immunocompromised patients. Ultimately, the integration of individual traits into a clinically applicable process to predict the risk and progression of disease, and the efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis and therapy, holds the promise of a pioneering innovation benefiting patients at risk of IA. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 18% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 15% |
| Engineering | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 13% |
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 27 May 2015.
All research outputs
#20,288,585
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,390
of 24,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,608
of 264,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#312
of 370 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,788 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 264,458 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 370 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.