↓ Skip to main content

Imprinting disorders: a group of congenital disorders with overlapping patterns of molecular changes affecting imprinted loci

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epigenetics, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
169 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
217 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
Imprinting disorders: a group of congenital disorders with overlapping patterns of molecular changes affecting imprinted loci
Published in
Clinical Epigenetics, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13148-015-0143-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Eggermann, Guiomar Perez de Nanclares, Eamonn R. Maher, I. Karen Temple, Zeynep Tümer, David Monk, Deborah J. G. Mackay, Karen Grønskov, Andrea Riccio, Agnès Linglart, Irène Netchine

Abstract

Congenital imprinting disorders (IDs) are characterised by molecular changes affecting imprinted chromosomal regions and genes, i.e. genes that are expressed in a parent-of-origin specific manner. Recent years have seen a great expansion in the range of alterations in regulation, dosage or DNA sequence shown to disturb imprinted gene expression, and the correspondingly broad range of resultant clinical syndromes. At the same time, however, it has become clear that this diversity of IDs has common underlying principles, not only in shared molecular mechanisms, but also in interrelated clinical impacts upon growth, development and metabolism. Thus, detailed and systematic analysis of IDs can not only identify unifying principles of molecular epigenetics in health and disease, but also support personalisation of diagnosis and management for individual patients and families.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 217 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 217 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 44 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 14%
Student > Master 29 13%
Researcher 22 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 4%
Other 21 10%
Unknown 61 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 95 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 1%
Social Sciences 2 <1%
Other 5 2%
Unknown 64 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 20 January 2023.
All research outputs
#3,232,654
of 25,202,494 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epigenetics
#234
of 1,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,785
of 288,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epigenetics
#8
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,202,494 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,429 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 288,072 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.