↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Clinical use of anti-TNF therapy and increased risk of infections

Overview of attention for article published in Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
215 Mendeley
Title
Clinical use of anti-TNF therapy and increased risk of infections
Published in
Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety, March 2013
DOI 10.2147/dhps.s28801
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tauseef Ali, Sindhu Kaitha, Sultan Mahmood, Abdul Ftesi, Jordan Stone, Michael S Bronze

Abstract

Biologics such as antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) drugs have emerged as important agents in the treatment of many chronic inflammatory diseases, especially in cases refractory to conventional treatment modalities. However, opportunistic infections have become a major safety concern in patients on anti-TNF therapy, and physicians who utilize these agents must understand the increased risks of infection. A literature review of the published data on the risk of bacterial, viral, fungal, and parasitic infections associated with anti-TNF therapy was performed and the clinical presentation, diagnostic tests, management, and prevention of opportunistic infections in patients receiving anti-TNF therapy were reviewed. Awareness of the therapeutic potential and associated adverse events is necessary for maximizing therapeutic benefits while minimizing adverse effects from anti-TNF treatments. Patients should be adequately vaccinated when possible and closely monitored for early signs of infection. When serious infections occur, withdrawal of anti-TNF therapy may be necessary until the infection has been identified and properly treated.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 215 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 213 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 33 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 13%
Other 26 12%
Student > Master 25 12%
Researcher 18 8%
Other 38 18%
Unknown 48 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 12 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 4%
Other 26 12%
Unknown 59 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 June 2017.
All research outputs
#8,437,555
of 25,809,907 outputs
Outputs from Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety
#80
of 162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,183
of 207,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,809,907 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 207,187 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 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.