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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Dissociation of amyloid biomarkers in PET and CSF in Alzheimer’s disease: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Neurology, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12883-015-0410-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthias L. Schroeter, Solveig Tiepolt, Anke Marschhauser, Angelika Thöne-Otto, Karl-Titus Hoffmann, Henryk Barthel, Hellmuth Obrig, Osama Sabri |
| Abstract |
Recently, biomarkers have been suggested to be incorporated into diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Regarding disease-specific brain amyloid-beta deposition these comprise low amyloid-beta 1-42 in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and positive positron emission tomography (PET) amyloid imaging, while neuronal degeneration is evidenced by high total and phosphorylated tau levels in CSF (t-/p-tau), regional hypometabolism ([(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET, FDG-PET) and characteristic atrophy-patterns (magnetic resonance imaging, MRI). Here we present a case of clinically and biomarker supported AD (CSF t-/p-tau, MRI, FDG-PET) in a 59-year-old Caucasian man in whom indicators of amyloid-beta deposition dissociated between CSF parameters and the respective PET imaging. Such cases highlight the necessity to better understand potential dissociations between PET and CSF data for amyloid-beta biomarkers, because they are currently considered interchangeably valid with regard to in-vivo evidence for AD pathology. This is more important since amyloid deposition markers can be considered a very first prognostic indicator of imminent AD, prior to neurodegenerative biomarkers and cognitive symptoms. The case illustrates the need for further longitudinal data on potential dissociations of AD biomarkers to devise recommendations for their better prognostic and diagnostic interpretation in the future. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Unknown | 11 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 30% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 20% |
| Psychology | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 28 August 2015.
All research outputs
#4,178,916
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#493
of 2,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,733
of 267,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#15
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 267,563 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.