↓ Skip to main content

Association of mitochondrial DNA variants with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) symptoms

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
30 tweeters
facebook
8 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Association of mitochondrial DNA variants with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) symptoms
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12967-016-1104-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maureen R. Hanson, Zhenglong Gu, Alon Keinan, Kaixiong Ye, Arnaud Germain, Paul Billing-Ross

Abstract

Earlier this year, we described an analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variants in myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME)/chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) patients and healthy controls. We reported that there was no significant association of haplogroups or singe nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with disease status. Nevertheless, a commentary about our paper appeared (Finsterer and Zarrouk-Mahjoub. J Transl Med14:182, 2016) that criticized the association of mtDNA haplogroups with ME/CFS, a conclusion that was absent from our paper. The aforementioned commentary also demanded experiments that were outside of the scope of our study, ones that we had suggested as follow-up studies. Because they failed to consult a published and cited report describing the cohorts we studied, the authors also cast aspersions on the method of selection of cases for inclusion. We reiterate that we observed statistically significant association of mtDNA variants with particular symptoms and their severity, though we observed no association with disease status.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 22%
Student > Bachelor 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Researcher 2 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 11%
Other 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 17%
Neuroscience 2 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 11%
Mathematics 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 2 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 23 September 2018.
All research outputs
#988,243
of 19,545,556 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#161
of 3,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,022
of 405,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#19
of 330 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,545,556 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 405,768 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 330 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.