↓ Skip to main content

Management of adult patients with Langerhans cell histiocytosis: recommendations from an expert panel on behalf of Euro-Histio-Net

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
286 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
153 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 adult patients with Langerhans cell histiocytosis: recommendations from an expert panel on behalf of Euro-Histio-Net
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-8-72
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Girschikofsky, Maurizio Arico, Diego Castillo, Anthony Chu, Claus Doberauer, Joachim Fichter, Julien Haroche, Gregory A Kaltsas, Polyzois Makras, Angelo V Marzano, Mathilde de Menthon, Oliver Micke, Emanuela Passoni, Heinrich M Seegenschmiedt, Abdellatif Tazi, Kenneth L McClain

Abstract

Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis (LCH) is an orphan disease of clonal dendritic cells which may affect any organ of the body. Most of the knowledge about the diagnosis and therapy is based on pedriatic studies. Adult LCH patients are often evaluated by physicians who focus on only the most obviously affected organ without sufficient evaluation of other systems, resulting in patients being underdiagnosed and/or incompletely staged. Furthermore they may be treated with pediatric-based therapies which are less effective and sometimes more toxic for adults. The published literature on adult LCH cases lacks a comprehensive discussion on the differences between pediatric and adult patients and there are no recommendations for evaluation and comparative therapies. In order to fill this void, a number of experts in this field cooperated to develop the first recommendations for management of adult patients with LCH. Key questions were selected according to the clinical relevance focusing on diagnostic work up, therapy, and follow up. Based on the available literature up to December 2012, recommendations were established, drafts were commented by the entire group, and redrafted by the executive editor. The quality of evidence of the recommendations is predominantly attributed to the level of expert opinion. Final agreement was by consensus.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 148 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 25 16%
Student > Postgraduate 19 12%
Researcher 16 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Other 35 23%
Unknown 31 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 98 64%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Engineering 3 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 1%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 1%
Other 8 5%
Unknown 35 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 30 January 2022.
All research outputs
#6,930,204
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#918
of 3,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,443
of 205,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#15
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,105 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 205,986 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 64% of its contemporaries.