↓ Skip to main content

Use of Thrombopoietin Receptor Agonists in Childhood Immune Thrombocytopenia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Use of Thrombopoietin Receptor Agonists in Childhood Immune Thrombocytopenia
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fped.2015.00070
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angelica Maria Garzon, William Beau Mitchell

Abstract

Most children with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) will have spontaneous remission regardless of therapy, while about 20% will go on to have chronic ITP. In those children with chronic ITP who need treatment, standard therapies for acute ITP may have adverse effects that complicate their long-term use. Thus, alternative treatment options are needed for children with chronic ITP. Thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RA) have been shown to be safe and efficacious in adults with ITP, and represent a new treatment option for children with chronic ITP. One TPO-RA, eltrombopag, is now approved for children. Clinical trials in children are ongoing and data are emerging on safety and efficacy. This review will focus on the physiology of TPO-RA, their clinical use in children, as well as the long-term safety issues that need to be considered when using these agents.

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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 16%
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 10 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 34%
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 21 October 2015.
All research outputs
#13,210,525
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1,638
of 5,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,744
of 264,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#10
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,958 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 264,389 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 50% of its contemporaries.