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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Safety of new DAAs for chronic HCV infection in a real life experience: role of a surveillance network based on clinician and hospital pharmacist
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Infectious Agents and Cancer, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13027-017-0119-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Nappi, A. Perrella, P. Bellopede, A. Lanza, A. Izzi, M. Spatarella, C. Sbreglia |
| Abstract |
Direct Antiviral Agents (DAAs) for HCV therapy represents a step ahead in the cure of chronic hepatitis C. Notwithstanding the promising results in several clinical trials, few data are available on adverse effects in real life settings. We have evaluated 170 patients with persistent infection and on those eligible to treatment we have followed up them through a network managed by clinician and hospital pharmacist. According to our data we have found that 41% (32 out of 78) of enrolled patients experienced adverse reactions, of these 40% were in those under 65 years while 60% was in patients older than 65 years, SVR was achieved in 88% of the patients (including drop-out). We had 4 drop-out treatment due to major adverse reaction (heart and lung related). Even if new antiviral drugs seem to be promising, according to SVR, they require careful follow-up, possibly managed by clinician and hospital pharmacist, to avoid unrecognized side effects which may affect adherence and the real impact of these drugs on chronically infected subjects. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 9 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 32% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 10 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 February 2017.
All research outputs
#20,406,219
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Infectious Agents and Cancer
#472
of 520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#355,840
of 420,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infectious Agents and Cancer
#12
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 520 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 420,233 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.