↓ Skip to main content

Founder mutations in Tunisia: implications for diagnosis in North Africa and Middle East

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, January 2012
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 (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Founder mutations in Tunisia: implications for diagnosis in North Africa and Middle East
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-7-52
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lilia Romdhane, Rym Kefi, Hela Azaiez, Nizar Ben Halim, Koussay Dellagi, Sonia Abdelhak

Abstract

Tunisia is a North African country of 10 million inhabitants. The native background population is Berber. However, throughout its history, Tunisia has been the site of invasions and migratory waves of allogenic populations and ethnic groups such as Phoenicians, Romans, Vandals, Arabs, Ottomans and French. Like neighbouring and Middle Eastern countries, the Tunisian population shows a relatively high rate of consanguinity and endogamy that favor expression of recessive genetic disorders at relatively high rates. Many factors could contribute to the recurrence of monogenic morbid trait expression. Among them, founder mutations that arise in one ancestral individual and diffuse through generations in isolated communities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 20%
Student > Master 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 4 8%
Other 13 26%
Unknown 8 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 18%
Chemical Engineering 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 9 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 25 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,875,975
of 15,923,575 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#222
of 1,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,006
of 133,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#3
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,923,575 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,699 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 133,131 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 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.