↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional treatment for inborn errors of metabolism: Indications, regulations, and availability of medical foods and dietary supplements using phenylketonuria as an example

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Genetics & Metabolism, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nutritional treatment for inborn errors of metabolism: Indications, regulations, and availability of medical foods and dietary supplements using phenylketonuria as an example
Published in
Molecular Genetics & Metabolism, July 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.ymgme.2012.07.005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathryn M. Camp, Michele A. Lloyd-Puryear, Kathleen L. Huntington

Abstract

Medical foods and dietary supplements are used to treat rare inborn errors of metabolism (IEM) identified through state-based universal newborn screening. These products are regulated under Food and Drug Administration (FDA) food and dietary supplement statutes. The lack of harmony in terminology used to refer to medical foods and dietary supplements and the misuse of words that imply that FDA regulates these products as drugs have led to confusion. These products are expensive and, although they are used for medical treatment of IEM, third-party payer coverage of these products is inconsistent across the United States. Clinicians and families report termination of coverage in late adolescence, failure to cover treatment during pregnancy, coverage for select conditions only, or no coverage. We describe the indications for specific nutritional treatment products for IEM and their regulation, availability, and categorization. We conclude with a discussion of the problems that have contributed to the paradox of identifying individuals with IEM through newborn screening but not guaranteeing that they receive optimal treatment. Throughout the paper, we use the nutritional treatment of phenylketonuria as an example of IEM treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Rwanda 1 <1%
Unknown 154 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 22%
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 10%
Student > Postgraduate 10 6%
Other 30 19%
Unknown 30 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 5%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 32 21%
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 01 February 2024.
All research outputs
#7,959,659
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Genetics & Metabolism
#693
of 2,383 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,002
of 177,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Genetics & Metabolism
#9
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,383 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 177,875 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 70% of its contemporaries.