↓ Skip to main content

Posterior cortical atrophy as a primary clinical phenotype of corticobasal syndrome with a progranulin gene rs5848 TT genotype

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, February 2016
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Posterior cortical atrophy as a primary clinical phenotype of corticobasal syndrome with a progranulin gene rs5848 TT genotype
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13023-016-0396-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guoping Peng, Ping Liu, Fangping He, Benyan Luo

Abstract

Posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) represents a special clinicoradiologic syndrome characterized by progressive visuospatial and visuoperceptual deficits. PCA and corticobasal syndrome (CBS) may share similar pathogenetic mechanisms. We report the clinical, neuropsychological, imaging, and genetic features of a patient with initial visual problems, who further developed other cognitive impairments and asymmetric extrapyramidal signs fitting into the diagnosis of CBS. Genetic testing revealed homozygous for the T allele of the rs5848 GRN variant. This study provided an evidence for CBS belonging to the clinical spectrum of GRN genetic variant and demonstrated CBS may initially present with symptoms of PCA in rare cases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Librarian 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 7 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 24%
Neuroscience 4 16%
Psychology 2 8%
Linguistics 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 8 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 03 January 2017.
All research outputs
#2,377,086
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#291
of 2,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,826
of 397,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#5
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,621 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 397,355 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 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 92% of its contemporaries.