| Title |
Subdural hematomas: glutaric aciduria type 1 or abusive head trauma? A systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12024-015-9698-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marloes E. M. Vester, Rob A. C. Bilo, Wouter A. Karst, Joost G. Daams, Wilma L. J. M. Duijst, Rick R. van Rijn |
| Abstract |
Glutaric aciduria type 1 (GA1) is a rare metabolic disorder of glutaryl-CoA-dehydrogenase enzyme deficiency. Children with GA1 are reported to be predisposed to subdural hematoma (SDH) development due to stretching of cortical veins secondary to cerebral atrophy and expansion of CSF spaces. Therefore, GA1 testing is part of the routine work-up in abusive head trauma (AHT). This systematic review addresses the coexistence of GA1 and SDH and the validity of GA1 in the differential diagnosis of AHT. A systematic literature review, with language restriction, of papers published before 1 Jan 2015, was performed using Pubmed, PsychINFO, and Embase. Inclusion criteria were reported SDHs, hygromas or effusions in GA1 patients up to 18 years of age. Of 1599 publications, 20 publications were included for analysis. In total 20 cases, 14 boys and 6 girls, were included. In eight cases (40 %) a child abuse work-up was performed, which was negative in all cases. Clinical history revealed the presence of trauma in eight cases (40 %). In only one case neuroradiology revealed no abnormalities related to GA1 according to the authors, although on evaluation we could not exclude AHT. From this systematic review we conclude that SDHs in 19/20 children with GA1 are accompanied by other brain abnormalities specific for GA1. One case with doubtful circumstances was the exception to this rule. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 88 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 12% |
| Professor | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 21 | 23% |
| Unknown | 19 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 49% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 3% |
| Psychology | 3 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 30 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 10 November 2022.
All research outputs
#6,652,837
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#158
of 1,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,780
of 267,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 267,660 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.