↓ Skip to main content

Natural history of alpha mannosidosis a longitudinal study

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, June 2013
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Natural history of alpha mannosidosis a longitudinal study
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-8-88
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Beck, Klaus J Olsen, James E Wraith, Jiri Zeman, Jean-Claude Michalski, Paul Saftig, Jens Fogh, Dag Malm

Abstract

Alpha-Mannosidosis is a rare lysosomal storage disorder, caused by the deficiency of the enzyme alpha-Mannosidase. Clinically it is characterized by hearing impairment, skeletal and neurological abnormalities and mental retardation. In order to characterize the clinical features and disease progression of patients affected by alpha-Mannosidosis, a survey study was conducted. 43 patients from 4 European countries participated in this longitudinal study. Age range of the participants was 3 to 42 years. For each patient a medical history, complete physical and neurological examination, joint range of motion and assessment of physical endurance and of lung function were completed. In addition, serum and urinary oligosaccharide levels were analysed.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Other 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 27 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 27%
Psychology 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Environmental Science 3 4%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 30 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 13 April 2023.
All research outputs
#3,138,737
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#427
of 3,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,075
of 209,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#6
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,105 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 209,230 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.