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 |
Bone health in phenylketonuria: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13023-015-0232-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Serwet Demirdas, Katie E Coakley, Peter H Bisschop, Carla E M Hollak, Annet M Bosch, Rani H Singh |
| Abstract |
Patients with Phenylketonuria (PKU) reportedly have decreased bone mineral density (BMD). The primary aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the extent and significance of low BMD in early treated patients with PKU. Secondary aims were to assess other bone status indicators including bone turnover markers (BTM) and to define areas for future research. Two research teams (Amsterdam, Netherlands and Atlanta, USA) performed literature searches for articles reporting data on BMD, osteopenia and osteoporosis, BTM or other bone indicators in patients with PKU. Included articles were compared between research teams and assessed for quality and risk of bias. A total of 13 unique articles were included; 11/13 articles reported BMD including a total of 360 patients. Ten out of 11 articles found BMD was significantly lower in patients with PKU. Meta-analyses for total BMD (TBMD; 3 studies; n = 133), lumbar spine BMD (LBMD; 7 studies; n = 247), and femoral neck BMD (FBMD; 2 studies; n = 78) Z-scores were performed. Overall effect sizes were: TBMD -0.45 (95% CI -0.61, -0.28); LBMD -0.70 (95% CI -0.82, -0.57); FBMD -0.96 (95% CI -1.42, -0.49). Definitions of osteopenia and osteoporosis were highly heterogeneous between studies and did not align with World Health Organization standards and the International Society for Clinical Densitometry positions on BMD measurement. Despite individual study findings of low BMD indicating higher risk of osteoporosis, pooled available data suggest reduction in BMD is not clinically important when using standard definitions of low BMD. Results from studies evaluating BTM are inconclusive. Phenylalanine concentration, vitamin D, PTH, and nutrient intake do not correlate with BMD or BTM. We recommend forthcoming studies use standard definitions of low BMD to determine clinical implications of BMD Z-scores below 0, explore cause of low BMD in the subset of patients with low BMD for chronological age (Z-score < -2) and assess fracture risk in patients with PKU. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 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 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 104 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 16% |
| Researcher | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 10% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 24 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 27 | 26% |
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 10 June 2015.
All research outputs
#17,489,487
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#2,078
of 3,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,272
of 386,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#24
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,163 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 386,816 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.