↓ Skip to main content

Natalizumab Treatment Reduces Fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis. Results from the TYNERGY Trial; A Study in the Real Life Setting

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2013
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 (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
163 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
Natalizumab Treatment Reduces Fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis. Results from the TYNERGY Trial; A Study in the Real Life Setting
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0058643
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anders Svenningsson, Eva Falk, Elisabeth G. Celius, Siegrid Fuchs, Karen Schreiber, Sara Berkö, Jennifer Sun, Iris-Katharina Penner, for the TYNERGY trial investigators

Abstract

Fatigue is a significant symptom in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. First-generation disease modifying therapies (DMTs) are at best moderately effective to improve fatigue. Observations from small cohorts have indicated that natalizumab, an antibody targeting VLA-4, may reduce MS-related fatigue. The TYNERGY study aimed to further evaluate the effects of natalizumab treatment on MS-related fatigue. In this one-armed clinical trial including 195 MS patients, natalizumab was prescribed in a real-life setting, and a validated questionnaire, the Fatigue Scale for Motor and Cognitive functions (FSMC), was used both before and after 12 months of treatment to evaluate a possible change in the fatigue experienced by the patients. In the treated cohort all measured variables, that is, fatigue score, quality of life, sleepiness, depression, cognition, and disability progression were improved from baseline (all p values<0.0001). Walking speed as measured by the six-minute walk-test also increased at month 12 (p = 0.0016). All patients were aware of the nature of the treatment agent, and of the study outcomes.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 162 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Researcher 20 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 12%
Student > Master 18 11%
Other 9 6%
Other 28 17%
Unknown 48 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 23%
Psychology 21 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 7%
Neuroscience 7 4%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 58 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 30 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,641,846
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#45,042
of 193,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,025
of 197,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,067
of 5,437 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,818 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 197,559 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,437 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.