↓ Skip to main content

Retrospective Analysis of Congenital Scoliosis

Overview of attention for article published in Spine, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Retrospective Analysis of Congenital Scoliosis
Published in
Spine, July 2017
DOI 10.1097/brs.0000000000001983
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eliane Beauregard-Lacroix, Jessica Tardif, Maria Vittoria Camurri, Emmanuelle Lemyre, Soraya Barchi, Stefan Parent, Philippe M Campeau

Abstract

Retrospective study of a series of 286 patients with congenital scoliosis OBJECTIVE.: To describe a large cohort of patients with congenital scoliosis and to propose an algorithm for genetic investigations SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: Congenital scoliosis is characterized by a spine curvature due to congenital malformations of the vertebrae and is frequently associated to other anomalies. The underlying causes remain unclear in most patients, although we know that genetics plays a role in the development of vertebral defects. IRB approval was obtained. We performed a retrospective study by consulting the hospital charts of 286 patients with CS seen at the CHU Sainte-Justine, Montreal, from 2004 to 2015. We compile information on radiological findings, associated malformations, and genetic tests. Results showed that 67.1% of patients had associated anomalies affecting different systems. Only a minority of patients had a syndromic diagnosis to explain their CS. Nevertheless, array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) performed in a minority of patients showed a high detection rate (31.3% had a chromosomal anomaly among 32 tested). We suggest that every patient with CS should have thorough investigations to rule out associated anomalies and that different genetic tests should be offered according to the associated clinical findings. 4.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 14%
Librarian 1 7%
Researcher 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Arts and Humanities 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,072,753
of 22,990,068 outputs
Outputs from Spine
#4,957
of 8,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,704
of 312,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Spine
#67
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,990,068 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. 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 312,216 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.