↓ Skip to main content

An update on the use of biologic therapies in the management of uveitis in Behçet’s disease: a comprehensive review

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
An update on the use of biologic therapies in the management of uveitis in Behçet’s disease: a comprehensive review
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13023-017-0681-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas W. McNally, Erika M. Damato, Philip I. Murray, Alastair K. Denniston, Robert J. Barry

Abstract

ᅟ: Behçet's disease (BD) is a systemic vasculitis characterised by a relapsing remitting course, affecting multiple organ systems. In the eye, it is a cause of potentially blinding inflammation in the form of uveitis. Management of uveitis in BD often requires the use of systemic immunosuppression, in order to reduce disease activity and prevent accumulation of irreversible damage. Whilst corticosteroids remain the mainstay of treatment, long-term use is limited by the development of adrenocorticotrophic side effects. There has therefore been significant interest in the use of corticosteroid-sparing immunosuppressive agents, and more recently, biologic therapies. Recent publications have demonstrated biologic therapy to have beneficial effects both on overall disease control, and quality of life for patients with BD. Widespread use of such agents is however limited, partly by the lack of high quality research evidence, and partly by the prohibitive cost of biologic treatments. In this review, we discuss the most recent research investigating the use of biologic therapy in uveitis due to BD, with consideration of health economics and quality of life outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 12%
Researcher 9 11%
Other 8 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 21 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 51%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 23 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 04 March 2019.
All research outputs
#6,482,317
of 22,990,068 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#896
of 2,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,160
of 283,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#16
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,990,068 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,637 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 283,559 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 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 54% of its contemporaries.