| Title |
Botulinum Toxin for the Treatment of Movement Disorders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11910-012-0286-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mary Ann Thenganatt, Stanley Fahn |
| Abstract |
After botulinum toxin was initially used to treat strabismus in the 1970s, others started using it to treat movement disorders including blepharospasm, hemifacial spasm, cervical dystonia, spasmodic dysphonia, and oromandibular dystonia. It was discovered that botulinum toxin can be an effective treatment for focal movement disorders with limited side effects. Over the past three decades, various formulations of botulinum toxin have been developed and the therapeutic use of these toxins has expanded in movement disorders and beyond. We review the history and mechanism of action of botulinum toxin, as well as describe different formulations available and their potential therapeutic uses in movement disorders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 54 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 23% |
| Unknown | 11 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 31 May 2013.
All research outputs
#14,146,599
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#623
of 913 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,158
of 166,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#12
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 913 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 166,741 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.