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 |
A follow-up report on the published paper Social and clinical impact of COVID-19 on patients with fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, March 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13023-023-02638-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hayley Wallace, Rhonda H. Lee, Edward C. Hsiao |
| Abstract |
Fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) is a rare genetic disorder associated with increased immune activity and severe, progressive heterotopic ossification. We previously described a cohort of 32 patients with FOP who were either exposed to SARS-CoV-2 or received a COVID-19 vaccine1 and showed that these patients did not develop heterotopic ossification after COVID-19 vaccination. Here, we present additional clinical data from new subjects and additional long-term follow-up from the first cohort. We enrolled 15 new subjects between August 24th, 2021 and May 17th, 2022 and collected additional self-reported outcomes. The larger cohort with 47 individuals encompassing 49 events showed that patients with FOP exhibited no additional change in FOP disease activity or flare activity resulting from COVID-19 infection or after receipt of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Thus, although any vaccination carries a risk of inducing heterotopic ossification in patients with FOP, our results show that patients with FOP who choose to receive a COVID-19 vaccination may be able to tolerate the procedure without a high risk of heterotopic ossification when following the published guidelines. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 22% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 11% |
| Professor | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 April 2023.
All research outputs
#15,012,243
of 25,722,279 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,513
of 3,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,667
of 424,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#21
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,722,279 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,179 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 424,378 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.