↓ Skip to main content

Management of hypersensivity pneumonitis

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Allergy, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Management of hypersensivity pneumonitis
Published in
Clinical and Translational Allergy, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/2045-7022-3-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ioana O Agache, Liliana Rogozea

Abstract

Hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) is an interstitial lung disease due to a combined type III and IV reaction with a granulomatous inflammation, caused by cytotoxic delayed hypersensitivity lymphocytes, in a Th1/Th17 milieu, chaperoned by a deficient suppressor function of T regulatory cells. Skewing toward a Th2 phenotype is reported for chronic HP. Phenotypic expression and severity depends on environmental and/or host genetic and immune co-factors. The wide spectrum of causative antigens is continuously up-dated with new sources of airborne organic particles and drug-induced HP. The diagnosis requires a detailed history, measurement of environmental exposure, pulmonary function tests, imaging, detection of serum specific antibodies, broncho-alveolar lavage, antigen-induced lymphocyte proliferation, environmental or laboratory-controlled inhalation challenge and lung biopsy. Complete antigen avoidance is the best therapeutic measure, although very difficult to achieve in some cases. Systemic steroids are of value for subacute and chronic forms of HP, but do not influence long term outcome. Manipulation of the immune response in HP holds future promise.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
Mexico 1 3%
Unknown 31 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 30%
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 06 February 2013.
All research outputs
#16,048,009
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#549
of 756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,221
of 291,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 291,554 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.