↓ Skip to main content

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Like Conditions in Possible Association with Cholesterol-Lowering Drugs

Overview of attention for article published in Drug Safety, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
30 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Like Conditions in Possible Association with Cholesterol-Lowering Drugs
Published in
Drug Safety, October 2012
DOI 10.2165/00002018-200932080-00004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Beatrice A. Golomb, Edwin K. Kwon, Sabrina Koperski, Marcella A. Evans

Abstract

While cases of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or ALS-like conditions have arisen in apparent association with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors ('statins') and/or other lipid-lowering drugs (collectively termed 'statins' in this paper for brevity), additional information is needed to understand whether the connection may be causal. The University of California, San Diego (UCSD) Statin Effects Study is a patient-targeted adverse event surveillance project focused on lipid-lowering agents, whose aim is to capitalize on patient reporting to further define characteristics and natural history of statin adverse effects (AEs), and to ascertain whether a patient-targeted surveillance system might lead to presumptive identification of previously unrecognized AEs. ALS was a candidate 'new' AE identified through this process. The aim of the analysis presented here was to examine characteristics and natural history of reported statin-associated ALS-like conditions with attention to factors that may bear on the issue of causality.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Czechia 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Student > Postgraduate 5 14%
Researcher 5 14%
Librarian 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 24%
Psychology 5 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 6 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. 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 01 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,066,863
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Drug Safety
#84
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,347
of 194,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Safety
#21
of 764 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 194,138 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 764 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.