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 |
Genetic susceptibility to total hip arthroplasty failure: a case-control study on the influence of MMP 1 gene polymorphism
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diagnostic Pathology, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13000-014-0177-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yiguo Yan, Jianzhong Hu, Hongbin Lu, Wenjun Wang |
| Abstract |
BackgroundGenetic factors plays an important role in early failure of total hip arthroplasty (THA) etiology and MMP-1 gene polymorphism rs5854 may be involved. The present study was conducted to reveal the possible association between MMP-1 rs5854 C/T polymorphism and the risk of early failure of THA (aseptic loosening).MethodsThe rs5854 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in MMP-1 gene was genotyped in 63 subjects who were diagnosed as aseptic loosening after total hip arthroplasty within 10 years and in 81 age and gender matched controls.ResultsThe genotype frequencies of the MMP-1 rs5854 C/T polymorphism were 57.1% (CC), 28.6% (CT), and 14.3% (TT) in patients with failure of THA, and 79.0% (CC), 17.3% (CT), and 3.7% (TT) in the controls (P¿=¿0.0099). Rs5854 polymorphism was found to be significantly associated with increased risk of aseptic loosening.ConclusionThe results showed the rs5854 SNP was associated with increased risk of the early aseptic loosening susceptibility.Virtual SlidesThe virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/13000_2014_177. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Argentina | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 23% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 55% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 September 2014.
All research outputs
#15,306,972
of 22,765,347 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#535
of 1,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,397
of 252,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#14
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,765,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 252,277 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.