↓ Skip to main content

Alkaline Phosphatase and Hypophosphatasia

Overview of attention for article published in Calcified Tissue International, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#35 of 1,904)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users
patent
20 patents
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
287 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
230 Mendeley
Title
Alkaline Phosphatase and Hypophosphatasia
Published in
Calcified Tissue International, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00223-015-0079-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

José Luis Millán, Michael P. Whyte

Abstract

Hypophosphatasia (HPP) results from ALPL mutations leading to deficient activity of the tissue-non-specific alkaline phosphatase isozyme (TNAP) and thereby extracellular accumulation of inorganic pyrophosphate (PPi), a natural substrate of TNAP and potent inhibitor of mineralization. Thus, HPP features rickets or osteomalacia and hypomineralization of teeth. Enzyme replacement using mineral-targeted TNAP from birth prevented severe HPP in TNAP-knockout mice and was then shown to rescue and substantially treat infants and young children with life-threatening HPP. Clinical trials are revealing aspects of HPP pathophysiology not yet fully understood, such as craniosynostosis and muscle weakness when HPP is severe. New treatment approaches are under development to improve patient care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 230 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 13%
Student > Bachelor 28 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 11%
Student > Master 24 10%
Other 13 6%
Other 43 19%
Unknown 68 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 70 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 33 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 3%
Chemistry 5 2%
Other 24 10%
Unknown 77 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. 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 April 2024.
All research outputs
#980,171
of 25,880,422 outputs
Outputs from Calcified Tissue International
#35
of 1,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,982
of 397,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Calcified Tissue International
#3
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,880,422 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 397,429 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.