↓ Skip to main content

Gardner Syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Clinical Dermatology, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Gardner Syndrome
Published in
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology, August 2012
DOI 10.2165/11311180-000000000-00000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edward Juhn, Amor Khachemoune

Abstract

Gardner syndrome is a variant of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and results in the manifestation of numerous external and internal symptoms including gastrointestinal polyps, osteomas, tumors, and epidermoid cysts. As such, it is highly recommended that physicians conduct full body examinations to catch the key clinical features of the disease when it is suspected. Stemming from a mutation in the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene, Gardner syndrome shares genetic correlations with the FAP phenotype; as a result, it becomes all the more crucial for physicians to be able to discern Gardner syndrome from other differential diagnoses such as Turcot syndrome, FAP, and other attenuated forms of familial polyposis. Fortunately, Gardner syndrome has characteristic polyps in the colon, osteomas, and also exhibits abnormalities in the retinal epithelium that discern it from others. Surgery is the most effective method of management for Gardner syndrome; restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis with mucosectomy is the top choice for colonic malignancies, and skin manifestations can be treated through a variety of excisions and therapy depending on location, size, and number of malignancies. Currently, there are no specific screening recommendations for Gardner syndrome, but testing following general screening recommendations for extra-colonic malignancies, genetic counseling, and endoscopy are encouraged.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 17%
Student > Master 9 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 13 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 12 21%
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 15 November 2023.
All research outputs
#8,588,429
of 25,506,250 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Dermatology
#574
of 1,070 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,123
of 187,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Dermatology
#143
of 283 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,506,250 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 1,070 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 187,099 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 283 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.