↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Critical appraisal of Timothy grass pollen extract GRAZAX® in the management of allergic rhinitis

Overview of attention for article published in Drug Design, Development and Therapy, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Critical appraisal of Timothy grass pollen extract GRAZAX® in the management of allergic rhinitis
Published in
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, November 2015
DOI 10.2147/dddt.s70432
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessandra Scaparrotta, Marina Attanasi, Marianna I Petrosino, Paola Di Filippo, Sabrina Di Pillo, Francesco Chiarelli

Abstract

Allergic rhinitis is one of the most common diseases of adult and pediatric age, associated with grass pollen (GP) allergy in >50% cases, with a consistent impact on quality of life of affected patients. A grass allergen tablet, containing standardized extract derived from Timothy grass (Phleum pratense) pollen and ~15 μg major allergen P. pratense (rPhl p 5), may be the future of allergen-specific immunotherapy (IT) for GP allergy. The aim of this review was to critically evaluate the role of Timothy GP extract IT for the management of allergic rhinitis. For this purpose, we have tried to analyze potential mechanisms of action at the basis of Timothy GP extract, we have reviewed efficacy studies to establish potential benefits and clinical response, and we have also evaluated safety and tolerability profiles and patient focus perspective, such as quality of life, satisfaction and acceptability, and compliance to this IT.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 19%
Student > Bachelor 6 17%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 39%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 31%
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 10 April 2023.
All research outputs
#8,039,503
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#541
of 2,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,853
of 295,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#22
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 295,303 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.