↓ Skip to main content

Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Genotype Prediction Models in a Pediatric Population

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Cardiology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Genotype Prediction Models in a Pediatric Population
Published in
Pediatric Cardiology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00246-018-1810-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Randa Newman, John Lynn Jefferies, Clifford Chin, Hua He, Amy Shikany, Erin M. Miller, Ashley Parrott

Abstract

The Toronto Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (HCM) Genotype Score and Mayo HCM Genotype Predictor are risk assessment models developed to estimate a patient's likelihood of testing positive for a pathogenic variant causative of HCM. These models were developed from adult populations with HCM based on factors that have been associated with a positive genotype and have not been validated in external populations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the overall predictive abilities of these models in a clinical pediatric HCM setting. A retrospective medical record review of 77 pediatric patients with gene panel testing for HCM between September 2005 and June 2015 was performed. Clinical and echocardiographic variables used in the developed models were collected and used to calculate scores for each patient. To evaluate model performance, the ability to discriminate between a carrier and non-carrier was assessed by area under the ROC curve (AUC) and overall calibration was evaluated by the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistic. Discrimination assessed by AUC was 0.72 (P < 0.001) for the Toronto model and 0.67 (P = 0.004) for the Mayo model. The Toronto model and the Mayo model showed P values of 0.36 and 0.82, respectively, for model calibration. Our findings suggest that these models are useful in predicting a positive genetic test result in a pediatric HCM setting. They may be used to aid healthcare providers in communicating risk and enhance patient decision-making regarding pursuit of genetic testing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 5 15%
Other 4 12%
Researcher 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 12%
Engineering 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 10 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 08 February 2018.
All research outputs
#7,297,348
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Cardiology
#262
of 1,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,889
of 441,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Cardiology
#2
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,414 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 441,261 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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 94% of its contemporaries.