↓ Skip to main content

Liver involvement in congenital disorders of glycosylation (CDG). A systematic review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
91 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
Title
Liver involvement in congenital disorders of glycosylation (CDG). A systematic review of the literature
Published in
Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10545-016-0012-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

D. Marques‐da‐Silva, V. dos Reis Ferreira, M. Monticelli, P. Janeiro, P. A. Videira, P. Witters, J. Jaeken, D. Cassiman

Abstract

Congenital disorders of glycosylation (CDG) are a rapidly growing family of genetic diseases caused by defects in glycosylation. Nearly 100 CDG types are known so far. Patients present a great phenotypic diversity ranging from poly- to mono-organ/system involvement and from very mild to extremely severe presentation. In this literature review, we summarize the liver involvement reported in CDG patients. Although liver involvement is present in only a minority of the reported CDG types (22 %), it can be debilitating or even life-threatening. Sixteen of the patients we collated here developed cirrhosis, 10 had liver failure. We distinguish two main groups: on the one hand, the CDG types with predominant or isolated liver involvement including MPI-CDG, TMEM199-CDG, CCDC115-CDG, and ATP6AP1-CDG, and on the other hand, the CDG types associated with liver disease but not as a striking, unique or predominant feature, including PMM2-CDG, ALG1-CDG, ALG3-CDG, ALG6-CDG, ALG8-CDG, ALG9-CDG, PGM1-CDG, and COG-CDG. This review aims to facilitate CDG patient identification and to understand CDG liver involvement, hopefully leading to earlier diagnosis, and better management and treatment.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 21%
Researcher 12 18%
Student > Master 12 18%
Other 3 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 17 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 21%
Chemistry 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 19 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 20 September 2019.
All research outputs
#5,690,090
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease
#444
of 1,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,555
of 417,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,861 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 417,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.