↓ Skip to main content

Prenatal Treatment of Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia—Not Standard of Care

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Genetic Counseling, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Prenatal Treatment of Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia—Not Standard of Care
Published in
Journal of Genetic Counseling, May 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10897-012-9508-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Selma Feldman Witchel, Walter L. Miller

Abstract

Congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) due to steroid 21-hydroxylase deficiency is a common autosomal recessive disorder due to mutations in the CYP21A2 gene. Since genetic counselors play a crucial role in educating families about inherited disorders, they need to have thorough knowledge regarding the pathophysiology of CAH especially the effects on the fetus, the complex genetics of this disorder, and the controversies surrounding experimental prenatal dexamethasone treatment. Affected female fetuses may have varying degree of virilization of the external genitalia. Starting in the 1980's, supraphysiologic glucocorticoid treatment was used to decrease the virilization of the external genitalia of affected female fetuses. However, recent clinical observations, animal studies and greater awareness of the details of human fetal adrenal physiology raise concerns regarding the safety of this prenatal treatment. We review the pathophysiology of CAH, the safety and ethical considerations of prenatal dexamethasone treatment and the views of multiple medical societies that conclude that this experimental therapy should only be done in prospective trials approved by ethical review boards.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 6%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 21%
Other 5 15%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Postgraduate 4 12%
Researcher 4 12%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Psychology 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Arts and Humanities 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 4 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 20 August 2012.
All research outputs
#3,008,710
of 23,263,851 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#168
of 1,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,224
of 166,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,263,851 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,174 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 166,014 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.