↓ Skip to main content

Central core disease

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, May 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
139 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 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
Central core disease
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, May 2007
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-2-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heinz Jungbluth

Abstract

Central core disease (CCD) is an inherited neuromuscular disorder characterised by central cores on muscle biopsy and clinical features of a congenital myopathy. Prevalence is unknown but the condition is probably more common than other congenital myopathies. CCD typically presents in infancy with hypotonia and motor developmental delay and is characterized by predominantly proximal weakness pronounced in the hip girdle; orthopaedic complications are common and malignant hyperthermia susceptibility (MHS) is a frequent complication. CCD and MHS are allelic conditions both due to (predominantly dominant) mutations in the skeletal muscle ryanodine receptor (RYR1) gene, encoding the principal skeletal muscle sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium release channel (RyR1). Altered excitability and/or changes in calcium homeostasis within muscle cells due to mutation-induced conformational changes of the RyR protein are considered the main pathogenetic mechanism(s). The diagnosis of CCD is based on the presence of suggestive clinical features and central cores on muscle biopsy; muscle MRI may show a characteristic pattern of selective muscle involvement and aid the diagnosis in cases with equivocal histopathological findings. Mutational analysis of the RYR1 gene may provide genetic confirmation of the diagnosis. Management is mainly supportive and has to anticipate susceptibility to potentially life-threatening reactions to general anaesthesia. Further evaluation of the underlying molecular mechanisms may provide the basis for future rational pharmacological treatment. In the majority of patients, weakness is static or only slowly progressive, with a favourable long-term outcome.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 118 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 18%
Researcher 19 15%
Other 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Master 12 10%
Other 26 21%
Unknown 20 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 13%
Neuroscience 8 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 20 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 November 2022.
All research outputs
#7,608,793
of 23,197,711 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,122
of 2,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,613
of 72,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,197,711 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,663 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 72,584 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.