↓ Skip to main content

Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH) due to 21-Hydroxylase Deficiency: A Comprehensive Focus on 233 Pathogenic Variants of CYP21A2 Gene

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy, February 2018
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
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH) due to 21-Hydroxylase Deficiency: A Comprehensive Focus on 233 Pathogenic Variants of CYP21A2 Gene
Published in
Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40291-018-0319-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paola Concolino, Alessandra Costella

Abstract

Congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) comprises a group of autosomal recessive disorders caused by complete or partial defects in one of the several steroidogenic enzymes involved in the synthesis of cortisol from cholesterol in the adrenal glands. More than 95-99% of all cases of CAH are caused by deficiency of steroid 21-hydroxylase, an enzyme encoded by the CYP21A2 gene. Currently, CYP21A2 genotyping is considered a valuable complement to biochemical investigations in the diagnosis of 21-hydroxylase deficiency. More than 200 mutations have been described in literature reports, and much energy is still focused on the clinical classification of new variants. In this review, we focus on molecular genetic features of 21-hydroxylase deficiency, performing an extensive survey of all clinical pathogenic variants modifying the whole sequence of the CYP21A2 gene. Our aim is to offer a very useful tool for clinical and genetic specialists in order to ease clinical diagnosis and genetic counseling.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 4 8%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 17 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 34%
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 18 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,839,807
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy
#209
of 385 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,303
of 474,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 385 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 474,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.