↓ Skip to main content

Association between Change in Normal Appearing White Matter Metabolites and Intrathecal Inflammation in Natalizumab-Treated Multiple Sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Association between Change in Normal Appearing White Matter Metabolites and Intrathecal Inflammation in Natalizumab-Treated Multiple Sclerosis
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0044739
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johan Mellergård, Anders Tisell, Olof Dahlqvist Leinhard, Ida Blystad, Anne-Marie Landtblom, Kaj Blennow, Bob Olsson, Charlotte Dahle, Jan Ernerudh, Peter Lundberg, Magnus Vrethem

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is associated not only with focal inflammatory lesions but also diffuse pathology in the central nervous system (CNS). Since there is no firm association between the amount of focal inflammatory lesions and disease severity, diffuse pathology in normal appearing white matter (NAWM) may be crucial for disease progression. Immunomodulating treatments for MS reduce the number of focal lesions, but possible effects on diffuse white matter pathology are less studied. Furthermore, it is not known whether intrathecal levels of inflammatory or neurodegenerative markers are associated with development of pathology in NAWM.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 41 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 9 21%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 35%
Neuroscience 6 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 11 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 05 October 2012.
All research outputs
#3,168,020
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#41,694
of 193,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,856
of 170,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#702
of 4,327 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,568 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 170,681 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,327 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.