↓ Skip to main content

Imaging findings of sterile pyogenic arthritis, pyoderma gangrenosum and acne (PAPA) syndrome: differential diagnosis and review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Radiology, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Imaging findings of sterile pyogenic arthritis, pyoderma gangrenosum and acne (PAPA) syndrome: differential diagnosis and review of the literature
Published in
Pediatric Radiology, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00247-018-4246-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudia Martinez-Rios, Mehul P. Jariwala, Kerri Highmore, Karen Watanabe Duffy, Lynn Spiegel, Ronald M. Laxer, Jennifer Stimec

Abstract

Pyogenic arthritis, pyoderma gangrenosum and acne (PAPA) syndrome is a rare autosomal-dominant autoinflammatory disease of incomplete penetrance and variable expression. PAPA syndrome is the result of a mutation in the proline serine threonine phosphatase-interacting protein 1 (PSTPIP1/CD2BP1) gene located on chromosome 15, which results in an abnormal overproduction of the pro-inflammatory cytokine interleukin-1β (IL-1). This syndrome clinically manifests as early onset of recurrent episodes of acute aseptic inflammation of the joints, generally occurring in the first two decades of life, followed by manifestation of characteristic skin lesions in the third decade, after an obvious decline in the joint symptoms. Although uncommon, the potential clinical implications of PAPA syndrome warrant an appropriate diagnosis in a timely fashion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 27%
Other 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 9 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,062,453
of 23,103,903 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Radiology
#587
of 2,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,968
of 341,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Radiology
#23
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,903 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,095 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 341,518 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 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 63% of its contemporaries.