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 |
Reliability and validity of the Wolfram Unified Rating Scale (WURS)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1750-1172-7-89 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chau Nguyen, Erin R Foster, Alexander R Paciorkowski, Amy Viehoever, Colleen Considine, Aidena Bondurant, Bess A Marshall, Tamara Hershey, Washington University Wolfram Study Group |
| Abstract |
Wolfram syndrome (WFS) is a rare, neurodegenerative disease that typically presents with childhood onset insulin dependent diabetes mellitus, followed by optic atrophy, diabetes insipidus, deafness, and neurological and psychiatric dysfunction. There is no cure for the disease, but recent advances in research have improved understanding of the disease course. Measuring disease severity and progression with reliable and validated tools is a prerequisite for clinical trials of any new intervention for neurodegenerative conditions. To this end, we developed the Wolfram Unified Rating Scale (WURS) to measure the severity and individual variability of WFS symptoms. The aim of this study is to develop and test the reliability and validity of the Wolfram Unified Rating Scale (WURS). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 49 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 18 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 10% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 42% |
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 25 December 2015.
All research outputs
#6,917,125
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#976
of 2,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,799
of 179,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#6
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,597 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 179,003 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.