↓ Skip to main content

Publication trends of Allergy, Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, and Clinical and Translational Allergy journals: a MeSH term-based bibliometric analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Allergy, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Publication trends of Allergy, Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, and Clinical and Translational Allergy journals: a MeSH term-based bibliometric analysis
Published in
Clinical and Translational Allergy, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13601-018-0191-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Martinho-Dias, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto, Júlio Botelho-Souza, António Soares, Luís Delgado, João Almeida Fonseca

Abstract

We performed a MeSH term-based bibliometric analysis aiming to assess the publication trends of EAACI journals, namely Allergy, Pediatric Allergy and Immunology (PAI) (from 1990 to 2015) and Clinical and Translational Allergy (CTA) (from its inception in 2011 to 2015). We also aimed to discuss the impact of the creation of CTA in the publication topics of Allergy and PAI. We analysed a total of 1973 articles and 23,660 MeSH terms. Most MeSH terms in the three journals fell in the category of "basic immunology and molecular biology" (BIMB). During the studied period, we observed an increase in the proportion of MeSH terms on BIMB, and a decreasing proportion of terms on allergic rhinitis and aeroallergens. The observed changes in Allergy and PAI publication topics hint at a possible impact from CTA creation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 12%
Librarian 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 12%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 29%
Unspecified 2 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 41%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 07 April 2018.
All research outputs
#4,260,730
of 15,922,425 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#245
of 480 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,715
of 278,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,922,425 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 480 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 278,349 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 67% 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