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 |
Topography of FUS pathology distinguishes late-onset BIBD from aFTLD-U
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Acta Neuropathologica Communications, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2051-5960-1-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edward B Lee, Jenny Russ, Hyunjoo Jung, Lauren B Elman, Lama M Chahine, Daniel Kremens, Bruce L Miller, H Branch Coslett, John Q Trojanowski, Vivianna M Van Deerlin, Leo F McCluskey |
| Abstract |
Multiple neurodegenerative diseases are characterized by the abnormal accumulation of FUS protein including various subtypes of frontotemporal lobar degeneration with FUS inclusions (FTLD-FUS). These subtypes include atypical frontotemporal lobar degeneration with ubiquitin-positive inclusions (aFTLD-U), basophilic inclusion body disease (BIBD) and neuronal intermediate filament inclusion disease (NIFID). Despite considerable overlap, certain pathologic features including differences in inclusion morphology, the subcellular localization of inclusions, and the relative paucity of subcortical FUS pathology in aFTLD-U indicate that these three entities represent related but distinct diseases. In this study, we report the clinical and pathologic features of three cases of aFTLD-U and two cases of late-onset BIBD with an emphasis on the anatomic distribution of FUS inclusions. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 25% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 20% |
| Other | 3 | 15% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 3 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 7 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 November 2013.
All research outputs
#15,271,909
of 22,710,079 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neuropathologica Communications
#1,130
of 1,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,697
of 193,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neuropathologica Communications
#13
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,710,079 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,364 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 193,636 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.