↓ Skip to main content

Allergic conjunctivitis: a comprehensive review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Italian Journal of Pediatrics, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
patent
4 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
163 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
441 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
Allergic conjunctivitis: a comprehensive review of the literature
Published in
Italian Journal of Pediatrics, March 2013
DOI 10.1186/1824-7288-39-18
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mario La Rosa, Elena Lionetti, Michele Reibaldi, Andrea Russo, Antonio Longo, Salvatore Leonardi, Stefania Tomarchio, Teresio Avitabile, Alfredo Reibaldi

Abstract

Ocular allergy represents one of the most common conditions encountered by allergists and ophthalmologists. Allergic conjunctivitis is often underdiagnosed and consequently undertreated. Basic and clinical research has provided a better understanding of the cells, mediators, and immunologic events, which occur in ocular allergy. New pharmacological agents have improved the efficacy and safety of ocular allergy treatment. An understanding of the immunologic mechanisms, clinical features, differential diagnosis, and treatment of ocular allergy may be useful to all specialists who deal with these patients. The purpose of this review is to systematically review literature underlining all the forms classified as ocular allergy: seasonal allergic conjunctivitis, perennial allergic conjunctivitis, vernal keratoconjunctivitis, atopic keratocongiuntivitis, contact allergy, and giant papillary conjunctivitis.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Cuba 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 433 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 78 18%
Student > Postgraduate 54 12%
Researcher 43 10%
Other 41 9%
Student > Master 36 8%
Other 56 13%
Unknown 133 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 180 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 19 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 4%
Other 28 6%
Unknown 153 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 24 November 2020.
All research outputs
#4,196,174
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#156
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,841
of 209,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 209,310 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.