| Title |
Efficacy and safety of the probiotic Lactobacillus paracasei LP-33 in allergic rhinitis: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (GA2LEN Study)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ejcn.2014.13 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
D J Costa, P Marteau, M Amouyal, L K Poulsen, E Hamelmann, M Cazaubiel, B Housez, S Leuillet, M Stavnsbjerg, P Molimard, S Courau, J Bousquet |
| Abstract |
An imbalance between Th1 and Th2 cells is involved in allergic rhinitis (AR) that may be improved by probiotics. To test the efficacy of the probiotic Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei LP-33, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial was carried out in patients with AR to grass pollen treated with loratadine and presenting altered quality of life. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 43% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 43% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 149 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 22% |
| Researcher | 28 | 18% |
| Other | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 29 | 19% |
| Unknown | 29 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 18 | 12% |
| Unknown | 39 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 19 October 2021.
All research outputs
#1,482,262
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#559
of 4,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,519
of 235,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#11
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,104 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 235,533 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.