↓ Skip to main content

Neuroimaging Endpoints in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in Neurotherapeutics, October 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 (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 Mendeley
Title
Neuroimaging Endpoints in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
Published in
Neurotherapeutics, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s13311-016-0484-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ricarda A. L. Menke, Federica Agosta, Julian Grosskreutz, Massimo Filippi, Martin R. Turner

Abstract

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive neurodegenerative, clinically heterogeneous syndrome pathologically overlapping with frontotemporal dementia. To date, therapeutic trials in animal models have not been able to predict treatment response in humans, and the revised ALS Functional Rating Scale, which is based on coarse disability measures, remains the gold-standard measure of disease progression. Advances in neuroimaging have enabled mapping of functional, structural, and molecular aspects of ALS pathology, and these objective measures may be uniquely sensitive to the detection of propagation of pathology in vivo. Abnormalities are detectable before clinical symptoms develop, offering the potential for neuroprotective intervention in familial cases. Although promising neuroimaging biomarker candidates for diagnosis, prognosis, and disease progression have emerged, these have been from the study of necessarily select patient cohorts identified in specialized referral centers. Further multicenter research is now needed to establish their validity as therapeutic outcome measures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Unknown 134 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 16%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Master 11 8%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 35 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 29%
Neuroscience 25 19%
Psychology 6 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 42 31%
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 10 October 2023.
All research outputs
#2,655,543
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Neurotherapeutics
#245
of 1,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,220
of 323,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurotherapeutics
#6
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 1,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 323,024 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 60% of its contemporaries.