↓ Skip to main content

Common and Rare Coding Genetic Variation Underlying the Electrocardiographic PR Interval

Overview of attention for article published in Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Common and Rare Coding Genetic Variation Underlying the Electrocardiographic PR Interval
Published in
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine, May 2018
DOI 10.1161/circgen.117.002037
Pubmed ID
Authors

Honghuang Lin, Jessica van Setten, Albert V. Smith, Nathan A. Bihlmeyer, Helen R. Warren, Jennifer A. Brody, Farid Radmanesh, Leanne Hall, Niels Grarup, Martina Müller-Nurasyid, Thibaud Boutin, Niek Verweij, Henry J. Lin, Ruifang Li-Gao, Marten E. van den Berg, Jonathan Marten, Stefan Weiss, Bram P. Prins, Jeffrey Haessler, Leo-Pekka Lyytikäinen, Hao Mei, Tamara B. Harris, Lenore J. Launer, Man Li, Alvaro Alonso, Elsayed Z. Soliman, John M. Connell, Paul L. Huang, Lu-Chen Weng, Heather S. Jameson, William Hucker, Alan Hanley, Nathan R. Tucker, Yii-Der Ida Chen, Joshua C. Bis, Kenneth M. Rice, Colleen M. Sitlani, Jan A. Kors, Zhijun Xie, Chengping Wen, Jared W. Magnani, Christopher P. Nelson, Jørgen K. Kanters, Moritz F. Sinner, Konstantin Strauch, Annette Peters, Melanie Waldenberger, Thomas Meitinger, Jette Bork-Jensen, Oluf Pedersen, Allan Linneberg, Igor Rudan, Rudolf A. de Boer, Peter van der Meer, Jie Yao, Xiuqing Guo, Kent D. Taylor, Nona Sotoodehnia, Jerome I. Rotter, Dennis O. Mook-Kanamori, Stella Trompet, Fernando Rivadeneira, André Uitterlinden, Mark Eijgelsheim, Sandosh Padmanabhan, Blair H. Smith, Henry Völzke, Stephan B. Felix, Georg Homuth, Uwe Völker, Massimo Mangino, Timothy D. Spector, Michiel L. Bots, Marco Perez, Mika Kähönen, Olli T. Raitakari, Vilmundur Gudnason, Dan E. Arking, Patricia B. Munroe, Bruce M. Psaty, Cornelia M. van Duijn, Emelia J. Benjamin, Jonathan Rosand, Nilesh J. Samani, Torben Hansen, Stefan Kääb, Ozren Polasek, Pim van der Harst, Susan R. Heckbert, J. Wouter Jukema, Bruno H. Stricker, Caroline Hayward, Marcus Dörr, Yalda Jamshidi, Folkert W. Asselbergs, Charles Kooperberg, Terho Lehtimäki, James G. Wilson, Patrick T. Ellinor, Steven A. Lubitz, Aaron Isaacs

Abstract

Electrical conduction from the cardiac sinoatrial node to the ventricles is critical for normal heart function. Genome-wide association studies have identified more than a dozen common genetic loci that are associated with PR interval. However, it is unclear whether rare and low-frequency variants also contribute to PR interval heritability. We performed large-scale meta-analyses of the PR interval that included 83 367 participants of European ancestry and 9436 of African ancestry. We examined both common and rare variants associated with the PR interval. We identified 31 genetic loci that were significantly associated with PR interval after Bonferroni correction (P<1.2×10-6), including 11 novel loci that have not been reported previously. Many of these loci are involved in heart morphogenesis. In gene-based analysis, we found that multiple rare variants at MYH6 (P=5.9×10-11) and SCN5A (P=1.1×10-7) were associated with PR interval. SCN5A locus also was implicated in the common variant analysis, whereas MYH6 was a novel locus. We identified common variants at 11 novel loci and rare variants within 2 gene regions that were significantly associated with PR interval. Our findings provide novel insights to the current understanding of atrioventricular conduction, which is critical for cardiac activity and an important determinant of health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 13%
Other 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 25 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 31 48%
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 11 February 2019.
All research outputs
#16,188,873
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
#775
of 1,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,832
of 339,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
#24
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 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 1,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 339,719 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.