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 |
SMA-EUROPE workshop report: opportunities and challenges in developing clinical trials for spinal muscular atrophy in Europe
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1750-1172-8-44 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nathalie Kayadjanian, Arthur Burghes, Richard S Finkel, Eugenio Mercuri, Francoise Rouault, Inge Schwersenz, Kevin Talbot |
| Abstract |
Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is the most common lethal recessive disease in childhood, and there is currently no effective treatment to halt disease progression. The translation of scientific advances into effective therapies is hampered by major roadblocks in clinical trials, including the complex regulatory environment in Europe, variations in standards of care, patient ascertainment and enrolment, a narrow therapeutic window and a lack of biomarkers of efficacy. In this context, SMA-Europe organized its first international workshop in July 2012 in Rome, gathering 34 scientists, clinicians and representatives of patient organizations to establish recommendations for improving clinical trials for SMAa. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Italy | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 27 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 18% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 11% |
| Psychology | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 18% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 April 2013.
All research outputs
#13,380,136
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,379
of 2,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,590
of 197,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#17
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,600 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 197,462 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.