↓ Skip to main content

Plasma exchange and glucocorticoid dosing in the treatment of anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody associated vasculitis (PEXIVAS): protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 4,618)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
80 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
168 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 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
Plasma exchange and glucocorticoid dosing in the treatment of anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody associated vasculitis (PEXIVAS): protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-14-73
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Walsh, Peter A Merkel, Chen Au Peh, Wladimir Szpirt, Loïc Guillevin, Charles D Pusey, Janak deZoysa, Natalie Ives, William F Clark, Karen Quillen, Jeffrey L Winters, Keith Wheatley, David Jayne

Abstract

Granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA, Wegener's) and microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) are small vessel vasculitides collectively referred to as anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV). AAV is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality due to uncontrolled disease and treatment toxicity. Small randomized trials suggest adjunctive plasma exchange may improve disease control, while observational evidence suggests that current oral glucocorticoid doses are associated with severe infections in patients with AAV. A randomized study of both plasma exchange and glucocorticoids is required to evaluate plasma exchange and oral glucocorticoid dosing in patients with AAV.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 80 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 <1%
Unknown 142 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 29 20%
Student > Postgraduate 19 13%
Researcher 17 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Student > Master 11 8%
Other 31 22%
Unknown 22 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 100 70%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 1%
Neuroscience 2 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 26 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 80. 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 January 2021.
All research outputs
#318,019
of 17,446,661 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#46
of 4,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,011
of 209,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,446,661 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 209,295 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them