↓ Skip to main content

The complete European guidelines on phenylketonuria: diagnosis and treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#18 of 3,179)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
22 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
512 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
959 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
The complete European guidelines on phenylketonuria: diagnosis and treatment
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13023-017-0685-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. M. J. van Wegberg, A. MacDonald, K. Ahring, A. Bélanger-Quintana, N. Blau, A. M. Bosch, A. Burlina, J. Campistol, F. Feillet, M. Giżewska, S. C. Huijbregts, S. Kearney, V. Leuzzi, F. Maillot, A. C. Muntau, M. van Rijn, F. Trefz, J. H. Walter, F. J. van Spronsen

Abstract

Phenylketonuria (PKU) is an autosomal recessive inborn error of phenylalanine metabolism caused by deficiency in the enzyme phenylalanine hydroxylase that converts phenylalanine into tyrosine. If left untreated, PKU results in increased phenylalanine concentrations in blood and brain, which cause severe intellectual disability, epilepsy and behavioural problems. PKU management differs widely across Europe and therefore these guidelines have been developed aiming to optimize and standardize PKU care. Professionals from 10 different European countries developed the guidelines according to the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation) method. Literature search, critical appraisal and evidence grading were conducted according to the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) method. The Delphi-method was used when there was no or little evidence available. External consultants reviewed the guidelines. Using these methods 70 statements were formulated based on the highest quality evidence available. The level of evidence of most recommendations is C or D. Although study designs and patient numbers are sub-optimal, many statements are convincing, important and relevant. In addition, knowledge gaps are identified which require further research in order to direct better care for the future.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 959 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 959 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 155 16%
Student > Master 103 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 6%
Researcher 58 6%
Other 49 5%
Other 138 14%
Unknown 395 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 188 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 102 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 65 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 4%
Psychology 26 3%
Other 127 13%
Unknown 415 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 190. 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 14 February 2023.
All research outputs
#213,341
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#18
of 3,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,362
of 335,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#3
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,179 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 335,124 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.