↓ Skip to main content

The Value of Fecal Markers in Predicting Relapse in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
The Value of Fecal Markers in Predicting Relapse in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fped.2017.00292
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bianca J. Galgut, Daniel A. Lemberg, Andrew S. Day, Steven T. Leach

Abstract

The inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are lifelong chronic illnesses that place an immense burden on patients. The primary aim of therapy is to reduce disease burden and prevent relapse. However, the occurrence of relapses is often unpredictable. Current disease monitoring is primarily by way of clinical indices, with relapses often only recognized once the inflammatory episode is established with subsequent symptoms and gut damage. The window between initial upregulation of the inflammatory response and the recognition of symptoms may provide an opportunity to prevent the relapse and associated morbidity. This review will describe the existing literature surrounding predictive indicators of relapse of IBD with a specific focus on fecal biomarkers. Fecal biomarkers offer promise as a convenient, non-invasive, low cost option for disease monitoring that is predictive of subsequent relapse. To exploit the potential of fecal biomarkers in this role, further research is now required. This research needs to assess multiple fecal markers in context with demographics, disease phenotype, genetics, and intestinal microbiome composition, to build disease behavior models that can provide the clinician with sufficient confidence to intervene and change the long-term disease course.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 11 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,498,694
of 23,659,844 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#2,062
of 6,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,989
of 444,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#49
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,659,844 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 444,241 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.