↓ Skip to main content

Variation in DNAH1 may contribute to primary ciliary dyskinesia

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Genomics, March 2015
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 (#19 of 2,444)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
89 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Variation in DNAH1 may contribute to primary ciliary dyskinesia
Published in
BMC Medical Genomics, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12881-015-0162-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Faiqa Imtiaz, Rabab Allam, Khushnooda Ramzan, Moeenaldeen Al-Sayed

Abstract

Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia (PCD) is a genetically heterogeneous ciliopathy caused by ultrastructural defects in ciliary or flagellar structure and is characterized by a number of clinical symptoms including recurrent respiratory infections progressing to permanent lung damage and infertility. Here we describe our search to delineate the molecular basis in two affected sisters with clinically diagnosed PCD from a consanguineous Saudi Arabian family, in which all known genes have been excluded. A homozygosity mapping-based approach was utilized that ultimately identified one single affected-shared region of homozygosity using 10 additional unaffected family members. A plausible candidate gene was directly sequenced and analyzed for mutations. A novel homozygous missense aberration (p.Lys1154Gln) was identified in both sisters in the DNAH1 gene that segregated completely with the disease phenotype. Further confirmation of this interesting variant was provided by exome-wide analysis in the proband. Molecular variation in DNAH1 may play a role in PCD and its potential contribution should be considered in patients where all known genes are excluded.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 89 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 23%
Student > Master 10 18%
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 3 5%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 13 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Neuroscience 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 68. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#630,483
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Genomics
#19
of 2,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,081
of 291,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Genomics
#1
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,444 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. 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 291,959 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.