↓ Skip to main content

Bone microarchitecture in ankylosing spondylitis and the association with bone mineral density, fractures, and syndesmophytes

Overview of attention for article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy, November 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 (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
89 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Bone microarchitecture in ankylosing spondylitis and the association with bone mineral density, fractures, and syndesmophytes
Published in
Arthritis Research & Therapy, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/ar4368
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eva Klingberg, Mattias Lorentzon, Jan Göthlin, Dan Mellström, Mats Geijer, Claes Ohlsson, Elizabeth J Atkinson, Sundeep Khosla, Hans Carlsten, Helena Forsblad-d’Elia

Abstract

Osteoporosis of the axial skeleton is a known complication of ankylosing spondylitis (AS), but bone loss affecting the peripheral skeleton is less studied. This study on volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) and bone microarchitecture in AS was conducted to compare peripheral vBMD in AS patients with that in healthy controls, to study vBMD in axial compared with peripheral bone, and to explore the relation between vertebral fractures, spinal osteoproliferation, and peripheral bone microarchitecture and density.

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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 68 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Other 8 11%
Student > Master 8 11%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 16 23%
Unknown 18 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 26 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 March 2014.
All research outputs
#3,561,046
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#793
of 3,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,568
of 228,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#8
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 228,602 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.