↓ Skip to main content

X-linked Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease, Arts syndrome, and prelingual non-syndromic deafness form a disease continuum: evidence from a family with a novel PRPS1 mutation

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
X-linked Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease, Arts syndrome, and prelingual non-syndromic deafness form a disease continuum: evidence from a family with a novel PRPS1 mutation
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-9-24
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthis Synofzik, Jennifer Müller vom Hagen, Tobias B Haack, Christian Wilhelm, Tobias Lindig, Stefanie Beck-Wödl, Sander B Nabuurs, André BP van Kuilenburg, Arjan PM de Brouwer, Ludger Schöls

Abstract

X-linked Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 5 (CMTX5), Arts syndrome, and non-syndromic sensorineural deafness (DFN2) are allelic syndromes, caused by reduced activity of phosphoribosylpyrophosphate synthetase 1 (PRS-I) due to loss-of-function mutations in PRPS1. As only few families have been described, knowledge about the relation between these syndromes, the phenotypic spectrum in patients and female carriers, and the relation to underlying PRS-I activity is limited.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 15%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Unspecified 4 9%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 13%
Neuroscience 5 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 9 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 October 2019.
All research outputs
#7,204,882
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#986
of 3,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,642
of 330,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#17
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
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 67% 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 330,518 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 74% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.