↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

Epimutation profiling in Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome: relationship with assisted reproductive technology

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epigenetics, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley

What is this page?

Summary Twitter Dimensions citations
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
Epimutation profiling in Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome: relationship with assisted reproductive technology
Published in
Clinical Epigenetics, December 2013
DOI 10.1186/1868-7083-5-23
Pubmed ID
24325814
Authors

Louise Tee, Derek HK Lim, Renuka P Dias, Marie-Odile Baudement, Amy A Slater, Gail Kirby, Tom Hancocks, Helen Stewart, Carol Hardy, Fiona Macdonald, Eamonn R Maher

Abstract

Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome (BWS) is a congenital overgrowth disorder associated with abnormalities in 11p15.5 imprinted genes. The most common cause is loss of methylation (epimutation) at the imprinting control centre 2 (IC2/KvDMR1). Most IC2 epimutations occur sporadically but an association with conception after assisted reproductive technologies (ART) has been reported. A subgroup of IC2 epimutation cases also harbour epimutations at other imprinting centres (ICs) outside of 11p15.5. We have investigated the relationship between these multiple epimutation cases (ME+), history of ART and clinical phenotype in a cohort of 187 BWS IC2 epimutation patients.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 21%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Researcher 5 12%
Other 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 3 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 December 2013.
All research outputs
#6,100,272
of 18,796,975 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epigenetics
#449
of 1,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,059
of 286,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epigenetics
#9
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,796,975 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,025 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 286,245 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.

This page is provided by Altmetric.