↓ Skip to main content

Low-dose oral imatinib in the treatment of systemic sclerosis interstitial lung disease unresponsive to cyclophosphamide: a phase II pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy, July 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 (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
87 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
Low-dose oral imatinib in the treatment of systemic sclerosis interstitial lung disease unresponsive to cyclophosphamide: a phase II pilot study
Published in
Arthritis Research & Therapy, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/ar4606
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paolo Fraticelli, Barbara Gabrielli, Giovanni Pomponio, Gabriele Valentini, Silvia Bosello, Piersandro Riboldi, Maria Gerosa, Paola Faggioli, Roberto Giacomelli, Nicoletta Del Papa, Roberto Gerli, Claudio Lunardi, Stefano Bombardieri, Walter Malorni, Angelo Corvetta, Gianluca Moroncini, Armando Gabrielli

Abstract

Pulmonary involvement represents a major cause of death of systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients. Recent data suggest that tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as imatinib, may be a therapeutic option for SSc patients. However, preliminary published clinical trials were inconclusive about imatinib efficacy and showed side effects. The purpose of this study was to verify efficacy and tolerability of low-dose imatinib on interstitial lung disease in a cohort of SSc patients unresponsive to cyclophosphamide therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 94 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 17%
Other 13 14%
Student > Postgraduate 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Master 7 7%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 25 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 48%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 24 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 15 July 2014.
All research outputs
#3,415,510
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#736
of 3,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,740
of 240,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#5
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 240,374 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.