↓ Skip to main content

Commentary on a GWAS: HDAC9 and the risk for ischaemic stroke

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Commentary on a GWAS: HDAC9 and the risk for ischaemic stroke
Published in
BMC Medicine, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-10-70
Pubmed ID
Authors

Werner Hacke, Caspar Grond-Ginsbach

Abstract

Modifiable risk factors like obesity, hypertension, smoking, physical inactivity or atrial fibrillation account for a significant proportion of the risk for ischaemic stroke, but genetic variation is also believed to contribute to the risk, although few genetic risk variants were identified to date. Common clinical subtypes of stroke are caused by cardiac embolism, large artery atherosclerosis and small cerebral vessel disease. Each of these underlying pathologies may have a specific genetic architecture.Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) showed association of variants near PITX2 and ZFHX3 with atrial fibrillation and stroke. ANRIL (antisense Non-coding RNA in the INK4 Locus (harboring the CDKN2A/B genes)) variants were related to a variety of vascular diseases (myocardial infarction, aortic and intracranial aneurysm), including ischaemic stroke. Now a recent GWAS published in Nature Genetics confirmed these previous associations, analyzed the specificity of the previous associations with particular stroke subtypes and identified a new association between HDAC9 and large vessel stroke. The findings suggest that well-recognized clinical stroke subtypes correspond to distinct aetiological entities. However, the molecular pathways that are affected by the identified genetic variants are not yet pinpointed, and the observed associations apply only for some, but not all victims of a specific stroke aetiology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 45 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Master 7 15%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 17%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 10 21%
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 10 July 2012.
All research outputs
#14,602,083
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,954
of 3,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,764
of 164,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#42
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 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 3,397 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 164,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.