↓ Skip to main content

Family Physician Perspectives on Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Family Physician Perspectives on Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2016.00012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jordan S. Orange, Filiz O. Seeborg, Marcia Boyle, Christopher Scalchunes, Vivian Hernandez-Trujillo

Abstract

Primary immunodeficiency diseases (PIDs) include over 250 diverse disorders. The current study assessed management of PID by family practice physicians. The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Primary Immunodeficiency Committee and the Immune Deficiency Foundation conducted an incentivized mail survey of family practice physician members of the American Medical Association and the American Osteopathic Association in direct patient care. Responses were compared with subspecialist immunologist responses from a similar survey. Surveys were returned by 528 (of 4500 surveys mailed) family practice physicians, of whom 44% reported following ≥1 patient with PID. Selective immunoglobulin A deficiency (21%) and chronic granulomatous disease (11%) were most common and were followed by significantly more subspecialist immunologists (P < 0.05). Use of intravenously administered immunoglobulin and live viral vaccinations across PID was significantly different (P < 0.05). Few family practice physicians were aware of professional guidelines for diagnosis and management of PID (4 vs. 79% of subspecialist immunologists, P < 0.05). Family practice physicians will likely encounter patients with PID diagnoses during their career. Differences in how family practice physicians and subspecialist immunologists manage patients with PID underscore areas where improved educational and training initiatives may benefit patient care.

X Demographics

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 20%
Student > Master 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 10 33%
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 30 July 2016.
All research outputs
#7,418,990
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#1,675
of 5,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,935
of 300,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 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 5,676 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 300,631 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 64% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.