↓ Skip to main content

Bifidobacterium breve and Lactobacillus rhamnosus treatment is as effective as budesonide at reducing inflammation in a murine model for chronic asthma

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, April 2014
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
patent
1 patent
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
89 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Bifidobacterium breve and Lactobacillus rhamnosus treatment is as effective as budesonide at reducing inflammation in a murine model for chronic asthma
Published in
Respiratory Research, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1465-9921-15-46
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seil Sagar, Mary E Morgan, Si Chen, Arjan P Vos, Johan Garssen, Jeroen van Bergenhenegouwen, Louis Boon, Niki A Georgiou, Aletta D Kraneveld, Gert Folkerts

Abstract

Asthma is estimated to affect as many as 300 million people worldwide and its incidence and prevalence are rapidly increasing throughout the world, especially in children and within developing countries. Recently, there has been a growing interest in the use of potentially beneficial bacteria for allergic diseases. This study is aimed at exploring the therapeutic effects of long-term treatment with two different beneficial bacterial strains (Bifidobacterium breve M-16 V and Lactobacillus rhamnosus NutRes1) and a glucocorticoid (budesonide), as a reference treatment, on inflammatory response in a murine model for chronic allergic asthma.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Master 10 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 9%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 28 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 November 2021.
All research outputs
#3,061,761
of 25,791,495 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#360
of 3,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,685
of 225,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#7
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,791,495 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 225,143 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.