↓ Skip to main content

Risk of allergic reactions to wine, in milk, egg and fish‐allergic patients

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Allergy, October 2011
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Risk of allergic reactions to wine, in milk, egg and fish‐allergic patients
Published in
Clinical and Translational Allergy, October 2011
DOI 10.1186/2045-7022-1-10
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emilia Vassilopoulou, Athanassios Karathanos, George Siragakis, Stavroula Giavi, Athanassios Sinaniotis, Nikolaos Douladiris, Montserrat Fernandez-Rivas, Michael Clausen, Nikolaos G Papadopoulos

Abstract

European legislators and wine producers still debate on the requirement for labeling of wines fined with potentially allergenic food proteins (casein, egg white or fish-derived isinglass). We investigated whether wines fined with known concentrations of these proteins have the potential to provoke clinical allergic reactions in relevant patients. In-house wines were produced for the study, fined with different concentrations of casein (n = 7), egg albumin (n = 1) and isinglass (n = 3). ELISA and PCR kits specific for the respective proteins were used to identify the fining agents. Skin prick tests and basophil activation tests were performed in patients with confirmed IgE-mediated relevant food allergies (n = 24). A wine consumption questionnaire and detailed history on possible reactions to wine was obtained in a multinational cohort of milk, egg or fish allergic patients (n = 53) and patients allergic to irrelevant foods as controls (n = 13). Fining agents were not detectable in wines with the available laboratory methods. Nevertheless, positive skin prick test reactions and basophil activation to the relevant wines were observed in the majority of patients with allergy to milk, egg or fish, correlating with the concentration of the fining agent. Among patients consuming wine, reported reactions were few and mild and similar with the ones reported from the control group. Casein, isinglass or egg, remaining in traces in wine after fining, present a very low risk for the respective food allergic consumers. Physician and patient awareness campaigns may be more suitable than generalized labeling to address this issue, as the latter may have negative impact on both non-allergic and allergic consumers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 22%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 8 22%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 22%
Chemical Engineering 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 10 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 August 2019.
All research outputs
#2,281,402
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#115
of 756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,377
of 150,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 150,530 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.