| Title |
Perverted Head-Shaking and Positional Downbeat Nystagmus in Essential Tremor
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Cerebellum, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12311-015-0683-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Young Eun Kim, Ji Soo Kim, Hui-Jun Yang, Ji Young Yun, Han-Joon Kim, Gwanhee Ehm, Jong-Min Kim, Beom S. Jeon |
| Abstract |
Even though the pathophysiology is not completely understood, cerebellar dysfunction has been invoked in essential tremor (ET). We evaluated cerebellar dysfunction in ET with the presence of perverted head-shaking (pHSN) and positional downbeat nystagmus (pDBN) which are known to reflect cerebellar dysfunction. First, we reviewed the videooculography (VOG) of 185 patients with ET from March 2007 to April 2010. Seventeen of 28 patients with pHSN and pDBN were followed up for at least a 1.8-year interval from baseline to determine the clinical course. And then, we recruited 52 consecutive patients with ET and compared their ocular motor findings with 51 normal controls using VOG. Among the 185 patients with ET, 28 (15.1 %) showed pHSN (n = 23, 12.4 %) or pDBN (n = 8, 4.3 %). Seventeen of them who were followed up did not develop Parkinsonism or other neurologic deficits during the observation period. The subsequent case-control study showed a higher prevalence of pHSN or pDBN (11/52, 21.2 %, pHSN in nine and pDBN in five) in patients with ET than in the normal controls (2/51, 3.9 %, pHSN only, P = 0.015). The tremor rating scale or involved body sites did not differ between the patients with and without pHSN/pDBN. pHSN and pDBN were more common in patients with ET than in the normal controls. This result supports that cerebellar dysfunction is associated with ET. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 18 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Researcher | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 21% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 42% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 11% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 March 2016.
All research outputs
#19,495,804
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from The Cerebellum
#659
of 957 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,515
of 270,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Cerebellum
#18
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 957 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 270,290 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.