↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Improving outcomes of refractory celiac disease – current and emerging treatment strategies

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
9 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Improving outcomes of refractory celiac disease – current and emerging treatment strategies
Published in
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, August 2016
DOI 10.2147/ceg.s87200
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeremy Woodward

Abstract

Intestinal inflammation and symptoms of celiac disease (CD) usually respond well to gluten withdrawal, but rare cases are refractory to diet. Two types of refractory CD are discriminated on the basis of the presence or absence of an atypical population of mucosal lymphocytes that may progress to enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma. Challenges remain in the secure diagnosis of both types of refractory disease, and evidence on which to base treatment recommendations is flawed by the small numbers of reported patients and the use of different diagnostic strategies. Recent advances in our understanding of the mechanisms of the condition in conjunction with the development of immunomodulatory agents for managing other inflammatory diseases are helping to shape future approaches to targeted therapy. Progression will depend on collaboration and recruitment to trials. In the meantime, there is evidence to suggest that earlier diagnosis and better follow-up and management of CD may prevent the development of refractoriness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 20%
Student > Master 11 17%
Researcher 8 12%
Other 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 17 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 16 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 October 2019.
All research outputs
#7,142,322
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#100
of 331 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,386
of 382,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 331 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 382,002 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 69% 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 83% of its contemporaries.