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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Usefulness of open mixed nut challenges to exclude tree nut allergy in children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Allergy, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13601-015-0062-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francine C. Van Erp, André C. Knulst, Irene L. Kok, Maartje F. van Velzen, Cornelis K. van der Ent, Yolanda Meijer |
| Abstract |
To minimize the risk of accidental reactions, atopic children with multiple sensitizations to tree nuts are advised to avoid all nuts. Multiple food challenges would be needed to confirm the clinical relevance, but are too burdensome to be practical. The usefulness of open mixed nut challenges in terms of safety, reactions during challenge, tolerance of the challenge material, effect on the elimination diet and satisfaction of the parents was evaluated. Open mixed nut challenges were performed in 19 children with a previous negative hazelnut challenge and long term elimination diet for tree nuts. Challenges were negative in 13 (68 %) children, in four (21 %) children (non-severe) allergic symptoms were observed. The challenges were well accepted, safe and efficient. We were able to avoid multiple nut challenges in 15 (79 %) children. Open mixed nut challenge can efficiently exclude multiple tree nut allergies in children with a lifelong nut free diet and low suspicion of clinical allergy. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 16 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 18% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 12% |
| Researcher | 2 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 2 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 18% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 March 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#687
of 756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,119
of 279,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 279,894 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.