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 |
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. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 States | 7 | 23% |
| Spain | 5 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 13% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Croatia | 1 | 3% |
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 77% |
| Scientists | 4 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 5 | 24% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 10% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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
#1,336,213
of 24,375,780 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#239
of 4,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,216
of 429,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#6
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,375,780 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 4,349 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 429,512 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 57 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 91% of its contemporaries.