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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Clinical features and predictors for disease natural progression in adults with Pompe disease: a nationwide prospective observational study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1750-1172-7-88 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nadine AME van der Beek, Juna M de Vries, Marloes LC Hagemans, Wim CJ Hop, Marian A Kroos, John HJ Wokke, Marianne de Visser, Baziel GM van Engelen, Jan BM Kuks, Anneke J van der Kooi, Nicolette C Notermans, Karin G Faber, Jan JGM Verschuuren, Arnold JJ Reuser, Ans T van der Ploeg, Pieter A van Doorn |
| Abstract |
Due partly to physicians' unawareness, many adults with Pompe disease are diagnosed with great delay. Besides, it is not well known which factors influence the rate of disease progression, and thus disease outcome. We delineated the specific clinical features of Pompe disease in adults, and mapped out the distribution and severity of muscle weakness, and the sequence of involvement of the individual muscle groups. Furthermore, we defined the natural disease course and identified prognostic factors for disease progression. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 25% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 101 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 16% |
| Other | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 26 | 25% |
| Unknown | 21 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 15% |
| Unknown | 24 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 12 September 2022.
All research outputs
#3,031,479
of 25,408,670 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#405
of 3,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,275
of 193,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#7
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,408,670 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,116 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. 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 193,319 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 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.