↓ Skip to main content

Haemoglobinopathies in Europe: health

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, July 2014
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 (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 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
Haemoglobinopathies in Europe: health & migration policy perspectives
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-9-97
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patricia Aguilar Martinez, Michael Angastiniotis, Androulla Eleftheriou, Beatrice Gulbis, Maria Del Mar Mañú Pereira, Roumyana Petrova-Benedict, Joan-Lluis Vives Corrons

Abstract

Major haemoglobinopathies (MH), such as thalassaemia syndromes (Thal) and sickle cell disorders (SCD), are genetic defects associated with chronic anaemia and other complications. In Europe, MH are rare diseases (RD) but their prevalence is significantly growing in many countries due to mobility and migration flows. This creates a growing health problem in the EU that has not yet been effectively addressed by Member States (MS) authorities. The present study has been conducted with the aim of: (i) providing an overview of policies for MH in 10 EU member states (MS) (ii) analysing the challenges linked to these RD due to growing requirements imposed by population, mobility and migration trends and (iii) identifying gaps, proposing improvements on existing policies, or developing new ones to fit the identified needs.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 128 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 12%
Researcher 15 12%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 43 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 7%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 47 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 01 July 2014.
All research outputs
#4,165,350
of 22,758,248 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#566
of 2,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,277
of 227,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#11
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,248 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,611 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 227,590 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 80% 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 74% of its contemporaries.