↓ Skip to main content

The nature of genetic susceptibility to multiple sclerosis: constraining the possibilities

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
The nature of genetic susceptibility to multiple sclerosis: constraining the possibilities
Published in
BMC Neurology, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12883-016-0575-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Douglas S. Goodin

Abstract

Epidemiological observations regarding certain population-wide parameters (e.g., disease-prevalence, recurrence-risk in relatives, gender predilections, and the distribution of common genetic-variants) place important constraints on the possibilities for the genetic-basis underlying susceptibility to multiple sclerosis (MS). Using very broad range-estimates for the different population-wide epidemiological parameters, a mathematical model can help elucidate the nature and the magnitude of these constraints. For MS no more than 8.5 % of the population can possibly be in the "genetically-susceptible" subset (defined as having a life-time MS-probability at least as high as the overall population average). Indeed, the expected MS-probability for this subset is more than 12 times that for every other person of the population who is not in this subset. Moreover, provided that those genetically susceptible persons (genotypes), who carry the well-established MS susceptibility allele (DRB1*1501), are equally or more likely to get MS than those susceptible persons, who don't carry this allele, then at least 84 % of MS-cases must come from this "genetically susceptible" subset. Finally, because men, compared to women, are at least as likely (and possibly more likely) to be susceptible, it can be demonstrated that women are more responsive to the environmental factors that are involved in MS-pathogenesis (whatever these are) and, thus, susceptible women are more likely actually to develop MS than susceptible men. Finally, in contrast to genetic susceptibility, more than 70 % of men (and likely also women) must have an environmental experience (including all of the necessary factors), which is sufficient to produce MS in a susceptible individual. As a result, because of these constraints, it is possible to distinguish two classes of persons, indicating either that MS can be caused by two fundamentally different pathophysiological mechanisms or that the large majority of the population is at no risk of the developing this disease regardless of their environmental experience. Moreover, although environmental-factors would play a critical role in both mechanisms (if both exist), there is no reason to expect that these factors are the same (or even similar) between the two.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 23%
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Professor 3 8%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 15%
Neuroscience 5 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 5 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 29 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,009,332
of 25,761,363 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#819
of 2,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,141
of 313,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#17
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,761,363 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,727 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 313,456 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 61% of its contemporaries.