↓ Skip to main content

Association of Developmental Venous Anomalies with Demyelinating Lesions in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Neuroradiology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
32 X users
facebook
11 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Association of Developmental Venous Anomalies with Demyelinating Lesions in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis
Published in
American Journal of Neuroradiology, September 2017
DOI 10.3174/ajnr.a5374
Pubmed ID
Authors

D.M. Rogers, M.E. Peckham, L.M. Shah, R.H. Wiggins

Abstract

We present 5 cases of demyelination in patients diagnosed with multiple sclerosis that are closely associated with a developmental venous anomaly. Although the presence of a central vein is a known phenomenon with multiple sclerosis plaques, demyelination occurring around developmental venous anomalies is an underreported phenomenon. Tumefactive demyelination can cause a diagnostic dilemma because of its overlapping imaging findings with central nervous system neoplasm. The relationship of a tumefactive plaque with a central vein can be diagnostically useful, and we suggest that if such a lesion is closely associated with a developmental venous anomaly, an inflammatory or demyelinating etiology should be a leading consideration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 20%
Student > Postgraduate 3 15%
Researcher 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 5 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 40%
Neuroscience 5 25%
Unspecified 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Unknown 5 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 17 February 2018.
All research outputs
#1,352,196
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#145
of 4,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,801
of 316,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Neuroradiology
#5
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 316,999 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 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 95% of its contemporaries.