↓ Skip to main content

Clinical characteristics of patients with spinocerebellar ataxias 1, 2, 3 and 6 in the US; a prospective observational study

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
116 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Clinical characteristics of patients with spinocerebellar ataxias 1, 2, 3 and 6 in the US; a prospective observational study
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-8-177
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tetsuo Ashizawa, Karla P Figueroa, Susan L Perlman, Christopher M Gomez, George R Wilmot, Jeremy D Schmahmann, Sarah H Ying, Theresa A Zesiewicz, Henry L Paulson, Vikram G Shakkottai, Khalaf O Bushara, Sheng-Han Kuo, Michael D Geschwind, Guangbin Xia, Pietro Mazzoni, Jeffrey P Krischer, David Cuthbertson, Amy Roberts Holbert, John H Ferguson, Stefan M Pulst, SH Subramony

Abstract

All spinocerebellar ataxias (SCAs) are rare diseases. SCA1, 2, 3 and 6 are the four most common SCAs, all caused by expanded polyglutamine-coding CAG repeats. Their pathomechanisms are becoming increasingly clear and well-designed clinical trials will be needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 81 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 18%
Researcher 13 15%
Student > Master 10 12%
Other 6 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 21 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 25%
Neuroscience 13 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 22 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 September 2020.
All research outputs
#4,645,596
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#642
of 3,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,267
of 224,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#11
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st 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 79% 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 224,681 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.