↓ Skip to main content

Exercise-induced anaphylaxis: A clinical view

Overview of attention for article published in Italian Journal of Pediatrics, September 2012
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 (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Exercise-induced anaphylaxis: A clinical view
Published in
Italian Journal of Pediatrics, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1824-7288-38-43
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlotta Povesi Dascola, Carlo Caffarelli

Abstract

Exercise-induced anaphylaxis (EIA) is a distinct form of physical allergy. The development of anaphylaxis during exertion often requires the concomitant exposure to triggering factors such as intake of foods (food dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis) or drugs prior to exercise, extreme environmental conditions. EIA is a rare, but serious disorder, which is often undetected or inadequately treated. This article summarizes current evidences on pathophysiology, diagnosis and management. We reviewed recent advances in factors triggering the release of mediators from mast cells which seems to play a pathogenetic role. A correct diagnosis is essential to avoid unnecessary restricted diet, to allow physical activity in subjects with EIA dependent from triggering factors such as food, and to manage attacks. An algorithm for diagnosing EIA based on medical history, IgE tests and exercise challenge test has been provided. In the long-term management of EIA, there is a need for educating patients and care-givers to avoid exposure to precipitating factors and to recognize and treat episodes. Future researches on existing questions are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Korea, Republic of 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Unknown 68 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 24%
Student > Master 11 15%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 5 7%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 13 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 23 November 2020.
All research outputs
#4,836,164
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#180
of 1,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,224
of 187,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#2
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 187,433 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.