↓ Skip to main content

Functional and genetic characterization of clinical malignant hyperthermia crises: a multi-centre study

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
Functional and genetic characterization of clinical malignant hyperthermia crises: a multi-centre study
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-9-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Werner Klingler, Sebastian Heiderich, Thierry Girard, Elvira Gravino, James JA Heffron, Stephan Johannsen, Karin Jurkat-Rott, Henrik Rüffert, Frank Schuster, Marc Snoeck, Vincenzo Sorrentino, Vincenzo Tegazzin, Frank Lehmann-Horn

Abstract

Malignant hyperthermia (MH) is a rare pharmacogenetic disorder which is characterized by life-threatening metabolic crises during general anesthesia. Classical triggering substances are volatile anesthetics and succinylcholine (SCh). The molecular basis of MH is excessive release of Ca2+ in skeletal muscle principally by a mutated ryanodine receptor type 1 (RyR1). To identify factors explaining the variable phenotypic presentation and complex pathomechanism, we analyzed proven MH events in terms of clinical course, muscle contracture, genetic factors and pharmocological triggers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 22%
Student > Master 8 12%
Other 6 9%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Other 16 25%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 9 14%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 January 2014.
All research outputs
#14,599,900
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,442
of 3,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,203
of 319,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#21
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 319,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.