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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Ehlers-Danlos syndrome versus cleidocranial dysplasia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Italian Journal of Pediatrics, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1824-7288-40-49 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maria Francesca Bedeschi, Francesca Bonarrigo, Francesca Manzoni, Donatella Milani, Maria Rosaria Piemontese, Sophie Guez, Susanna Esposito |
| Abstract |
The early identification of hereditary syndromes is essential for planning interventions to reduce the risk of complications. Unfortunately, clinical phenotypes in the first years of life and in mild cases are often poorly characterized. Moreover, some disease symptoms are common for several genetic conditions. In this report, a child was initially misdiagnosed with hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS); the correct diagnosis of cleidocranial dysplasia (CCD), which was confirmed by genetic findings, was not made until several years later. This case teaches that diagnoses of hereditary syndromes must be performed carefully and take clinical history, symptoms, and genetic analyses into account. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 18% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 18% |
| Unknown | 1 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 36% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 9% |
| Psychology | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,959,659
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#300
of 1,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,023
of 240,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#4
of 16 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 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 240,359 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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.