↓ Skip to main content

Features of Japanese patients with myelodysplastic syndrome in an aging population of Sado Island

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Hematology, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
Title
Features of Japanese patients with myelodysplastic syndrome in an aging population of Sado Island
Published in
International Journal of Hematology, February 2012
DOI 10.1007/s12185-012-1031-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kumiko Yagisawa, Kiyoshi Okazuka, Ken Toba, Masaru Urushiyama, Takashi Kuroha, Noriko Izumi, Yasuhiko Sibasaki, Masutaka Higashimura, Toshio Yano, Akihito Momoi, Akira Hattori, Ken Momotsu, Yoshifusa Aizawa

Abstract

Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is relatively common in the elderly, and aging of populations is progressing in developed nations, notably so in Japan. The major age group in Japan and Sado Island are distributed between 30 and 60 and between 50 and 80, respectively. The aim of this study was to analyze the features of MDS in the population of Sado Island to anticipate the characteristics of the disease in the near future. One-hundred and fifty-three patients (71 male, 82 female, 19-94 years old, median 73 years old) with de novo MDS between 1985 and 2005 were retrospectively evaluated. All patients were reclassified according to WHO-2001 criteria. The predictive power of the international prognostic scoring system and the WHO classification-based prognostic scoring system were evaluated. The major causes of death were leukemic transformation (38%) in refractory anemia with an excess of blasts and infection (48%) for total MDS. Age was another independent prognostic factor. Elderly patients exhibited a significantly poorer prognosis mainly due to infections such as pneumonia. Although novel remedies for MDS and hyperferremia have recently been developed, prevention of infection remains important in MDS, particularly for older patients.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 25%
Professor 1 13%
Lecturer 1 13%
Student > Master 1 13%
Unknown 3 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 38%
Social Sciences 1 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 13%
Unknown 3 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 August 2013.
All research outputs
#15,274,954
of 22,715,151 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Hematology
#705
of 1,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,737
of 155,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Hematology
#8
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,715,151 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,388 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 155,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 50% of its contemporaries.