| Title |
Emerging and future therapies for hemophilia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Blood Medicine, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/jbm.s42669 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marcus E Carr, Bartholomew J Tortella |
| Abstract |
The evolution of care in hemophilia is a remarkable story. Over the last 60 years, advances in protein purification, protein chemistry, donor screening, viral inactivation, gene sequencing, gene cloning, and recombinant protein production have dramatically enhanced the treatment and lives of patients with hemophilia. Recent efforts have produced enhanced half-life (EHL) clotting factors to better support prophylaxis and decrease the frequency of infusions. Medical needs remain in the areas of alternate modes of administration to decrease the need for venous access, better treatment, and prophylaxis for patients who form antibodies to clotting factors, and ultimately a cure of the underlying genetic defect. In this brief review, the authors summarize data on EHL clotting factors, introduce agents whose mode of action is not clotting factor replacement, and list current gene therapy efforts. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hungary | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 61 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 29% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 31% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 10 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 05 October 2023.
All research outputs
#2,444,878
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Blood Medicine
#25
of 318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,067
of 277,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Blood Medicine
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 277,177 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 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them