↓ Skip to main content

Adult-onset Alexander disease, associated with a mutation in an alternative GFAP transcript, may be phenotypically modulated by a non-neutral HDAC6 variant

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
patent
1 patent
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Adult-onset Alexander disease, associated with a mutation in an alternative GFAP transcript, may be phenotypically modulated by a non-neutral HDAC6 variant
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-8-66
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Melchionda, Mingyan Fang, Hairong Wang, Valeria Fugnanesi, Michela Morbin, Xuanzhu Liu, Wenyan Li, Isabella Ceccherini, Laura Farina, Mario Savoiardo, Pio D’Adamo, Jianguo Zhang, Alfredo Costa, Sabrina Ravaglia, Daniele Ghezzi, Massimo Zeviani

Abstract

We studied a family including two half-siblings, sharing the same mother, affected by slowly progressive, adult-onset neurological syndromes. In spite of the diversity of the clinical features, characterized by a mild movement disorder with cognitive impairment in the elder patient, and severe motor-neuron disease (MND) in her half-brother, the brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) features were compatible with adult-onset Alexander's disease (AOAD), suggesting different expression of the same, genetically determined, condition.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 46 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Other 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 8%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 23%
Neuroscience 10 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 12 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#2,755,578
of 12,043,827 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#318
of 1,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,122
of 135,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#10
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,043,827 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,304 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 135,125 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.