↓ Skip to main content

Health, wellbeing and lived experiences of adults with SMA: a scoping systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, March 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 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
Health, wellbeing and lived experiences of adults with SMA: a scoping systematic review
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, March 2020
DOI 10.1186/s13023-020-1339-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hamish W. Y. Wan, Kate A. Carey, Arlene D’Silva, Steve Vucic, Matthew C. Kiernan, Nadine A. Kasparian, Michelle A. Farrar

Abstract

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a neurodegenerative disease that has a substantial and multifaceted burden on affected adults. While advances in supportive care and therapies are rapidly reshaping the therapeutic environment, these efforts have largely centered on pediatric populations. Understanding the natural history, care pathways, and patient-reported outcomes associated with SMA in adulthood is critical to advancing health policy, practice and research across the disease spectrum. The aim of this study was to systematically review research investigating the healthcare, well-being and lived experiences of adults with SMA. In accordance with the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, seven electronic databases were systematically searched until January 2020 for studies examining clinical (physical health, natural history, treatment) and patient-reported (symptoms, physical function, mental health, quality of life, lived experiences) outcomes in adults with SMA. Study risk of bias and the level of evidence were assessed using validated tools. Ninety-five articles met eligibility criteria with clinical and methodological diversity observed across studies. A heterogeneous clinical spectrum with variability in natural history was evident in adults, yet slow declines in motor function were reported when observational periods extended beyond 2 years. There remains no high quality evidence of an efficacious drug treatment for adults. Limitations in mobility and daily activities associated with deteriorating physical health were commonly reported, alongside emotional difficulties, fatigue and a perceived lack of societal support, however there was no evidence regarding effective interventions. This systematic review identifies the many uncertainties regarding best clinical practice, treatment response, and long-term outcomes for adults with SMA. This comprehensive identification of the current gaps in knowledge is essential to guide future clinical research, best practice care, and advance health policy with the ultimate aim of reducing the burden associated with adult SMA.

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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 127 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Other 11 9%
Student > Master 9 7%
Researcher 7 6%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 54 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 57 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 August 2020.
All research outputs
#14,476,769
of 23,198,445 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,599
of 2,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,787
of 364,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#25
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,198,445 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,663 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 364,345 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.