| Title |
Understanding the evolving phenotype of vascular complications in telomere biology disorders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Angiogenesis, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10456-018-9640-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cecilia Higgs, Yanick J. Crow, Denise M. Adams, Emmanuel Chang, Don Hayes, Utz Herbig, James N. Huang, Ryan Himes, Kunal Jajoo, F. Brad Johnson, Susan D. Reynolds, Yoshihiro Yonekawa, Mary Armanios, Farid Boulad, Courtney D. DiNardo, Carlo Dufour, Frederick D. Goldman, Shakila Khan, Christian Kratz, Kasiani C. Myers, Ganesh Raghu, Blanche P. Alter, Geraldine Aubert, Sonia Bhala, Edward W. Cowen, Yigal Dror, Mounif El-Youssef, Bruce Friedman, Neelam Giri, Lisa Helms Guba, Payal P. Khincha, Tiffany F. Lin, Hilary Longhurst, Lisa J. McReynolds, Adam Nelson, Tim Olson, Anne Pariser, Rosario Perona, Ghadir Sasa, Kristen Schratz, Douglas A. Simonetto, Danielle Townsley, Michael Walsh, Katherine Stevens, Suneet Agarwal, Alison A. Bertuch, Sharon A. Savage, the Clinical Care Consortium for Telomere-associated Ailments (CCCTAA) |
| Abstract |
Vascular complications such as bleeding due to gastrointestinal telangiectatic anomalies, pulmonary arteriovenous malformations, hepatopulmonary syndrome, and retinal vessel abnormalities are being reported in patients with telomere biology disorders (TBDs) more frequently than previously described. The international clinical care consortium of telomere-associated ailments and family support group Dyskeratosis Congenita Outreach, Inc. held a workshop on vascular abnormalities in the TBDs at the National Cancer Institute in October 2017. Clinicians and basic scientists reviewed current data on vascular complications, hypotheses for the underlying biology and developed new collaborations to address the etiology and clinical management of vascular complications in TBDs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 | 6 | 38% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Belgium | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 88% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 18 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 12% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 17 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 22 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,229,989
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from Angiogenesis
#54
of 541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,926
of 334,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Angiogenesis
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 334,310 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.