↓ Skip to main content

Noonan syndrome – a new survey

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Medical Science, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Noonan syndrome – a new survey
Published in
Archives of Medical Science, December 2016
DOI 10.5114/aoms.2017.64720
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alireza Tafazoli, Peyman Eshraghi, Zahra Kamel Koleti, Mohammadreza Abbaszadegan

Abstract

Noonan syndrome (NS) is an autosomal dominant disorder with vast heterogeneity in clinical and genetic features. Various symptoms have been reported for this abnormality such as short stature, unusual facial characteristics, congenital heart abnormalities, developmental complications, and an elevated tumor incidence rate. Noonan syndrome shares clinical features with other rare conditions, including LEOPARD syndrome, cardio-facio-cutaneous syndrome, Noonan-like syndrome with loose anagen hair, and Costello syndrome. Germline mutations in the RAS-MAPK (mitogen-activated protein kinase) signal transduction pathway are responsible for NS and other related disorders. Noonan syndrome diagnosis is primarily based on clinical features, but molecular testing should be performed to confirm it in patients. Due to the high number of genes associated with NS and other RASopathy disorders, next-generation sequencing is the best choice for diagnostic testing. Patients with NS also have higher risk for leukemia and specific solid tumors. Age-specific guidelines for the management of NS are available.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 19%
Student > Postgraduate 7 10%
Student > Master 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Researcher 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 26 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 16%
Chemistry 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 28 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 February 2017.
All research outputs
#14,259,784
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Medical Science
#387
of 1,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,479
of 422,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Medical Science
#13
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,760 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 422,525 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.