↓ Skip to main content

A case report: autosomal recessive Myotonia congenita caused by a novel splice mutation (c.1401 + 1G > A) in CLCN1 gene of a Chinese Han patient

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
A case report: autosomal recessive Myotonia congenita caused by a novel splice mutation (c.1401 + 1G > A) in CLCN1 gene of a Chinese Han patient
Published in
BMC Neurology, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12883-018-1153-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jing Miao, Xiao-jing Wei, Xue-mei Liu, Zhi-xia Kang, Yan-lu Gao, Xue-fan Yu

Abstract

Autosomal recessive Myotonia congenita (Becker's disease) is caused by mutations in the CLCN1 gene. The condition is characterized by muscle stiffness during sustained muscle contraction and variable degree of muscle weakness that tends to improve with repeated contractions. A 21-year-old man presented with transient muscle stiffness since the last 10 years. He had difficulty in initiating movement and experienced muscle weakness after rest, which typically improved after repeated contraction (warm-up phenomenon). There was no significant family history. Medical examination showed generalized muscle hypertrophy. Serum creatine kinase level was 2-fold higher than the normal value. Electromyogram showed myotonic discharges. DNA sequence analysis identified a novel splice mutation (c.1401 + 1G > A) and a known mutation (c.1657A > T,p.Ile553Phe). He rapidly responded to treatment with mexiletine 100 mg three times a day for 6 months. This case report of autosomal recessive Myotonia congenita caused by a novel compound heterozygous mutation expands the genotypic spectrum of CLCN1 gene.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 11%
Student > Master 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 6 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 9 47%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Unknown 6 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 September 2018.
All research outputs
#15,680,078
of 23,301,510 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,514
of 2,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,263
of 341,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#32
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,301,510 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,489 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. 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 341,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.