↓ Skip to main content

Do epinephrine auto-injectors have an unsuitable needle length in children and adolescents at risk for anaphylaxis from food allergy?

Overview of attention for article published in Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology, March 2016
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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Do epinephrine auto-injectors have an unsuitable needle length in children and adolescents at risk for anaphylaxis from food allergy?
Published in
Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13223-016-0110-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sten Dreborg, Xia Wen, Laura Kim, Gina Tsai, Immaculate Nevis, Ryan Potts, Jack Chiu, Arunmozhi Dominic, Harold Kim

Abstract

Food allergy is the most common cause of anaphylaxis in children. Intramuscular delivery of epinephrine auto-injectors (EAI) is the standard of care for the treatment of anaphylaxis. We examined if children and adolescents at risk of anaphylaxis weighing 15-30 kg and >30 kg would receive epinephrine into the intramuscular space with the currently available EAI in North America and Europe. The distance from skin to muscle (STMD) and skin to bone (STBD) on the mid third anterolateral area of the right thigh was measured by ultrasound applying either high pressure (max) or slight pressure (min) in 102 children weighing 15-30 kg (group 1) and 100 children and adolescents, weighing more than 30 kg (group 2). Using a high pressure EAI (HPEAI), Epipen Jr(®) and Auvi-Q(®)/Allerject(®) 0.15 mg, 11/102 (11 %) children in group 1 and 38/102 (38 %) using another HPEAI, Jext(®), had a STMDmax that showed a risk of intraosseous injection. There was a 1 % risk of subcutaneous injection with these devices. There was no risk of intraosseous injection using a low pressure EAI (LPEAI), Emerade(®). In group 2, the risk of intraosseous injection using a HPEAI was 3 % and no risk using a LPEAI. However, the risk of subcutaneous injection using HPEAI was 9 % and using LPEAI was 2 %. There is a risk of intraosseous injection using HPEAI (Epipen(®)/Epipen Jr(®), Auvi-Q(®)/Allerject(®) and especially Jext(®)) in children at risk of anaphylaxis. There was also a risk of subcutaneous injection using the currently available HPEAI in children and adolescents.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 20%
Student > Master 8 18%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 6 13%
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 13 March 2017.
All research outputs
#2,252,983
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#124
of 924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,346
of 313,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#3
of 12 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 924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 313,562 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.