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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
H63D polymorphism in HFE is not associated with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neurobiology of Aging, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2012.07.020 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wouter van Rheenen, Frank P. Diekstra, Perry T.C. van Doormaal, Meinie Seelen, Kevin Kenna, Russell McLaughlin, Aleksey Shatunov, David Czell, Michael A. van Es, Paul W.J. van Vught, Philip van Damme, Bradley N. Smith, Stefan Waibel, H. Jurgen Schelhaas, Anneke J. van der Kooi, Marianne de Visser, Markus Weber, Wim Robberecht, Orla Hardiman, Pamela J. Shaw, Christopher E. Shaw, Karen E. Morrison, Ammar Al-Chalabi, Peter M. Andersen, Albert C. Ludolph, Jan H. Veldink, Leonard H. van den Berg |
| Abstract |
The H63D polymorphism in HFE has frequently been associated with susceptibility to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Regarding the role of HFE in iron homeostasis, iron accumulation is considered an important process in ALS. Furthermore, novel therapeutic strategies are being developed targeting this process. Evidence for this genetic association is, however, limited to several small studies. For this reason we studied the H63D polymorphism in a large European cohort including 3962 ALS patients and 5072 control subjects from 7 countries. After meta-analysis of previous studies and current findings we conclude that the H63D polymorphism in HFE is not associated with susceptibility to ALS, age at disease onset, or survival. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 31 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 16% |
| Professor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 5 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 31% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 16% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 October 2012.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Neurobiology of Aging
#4,224
of 4,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,796
of 191,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurobiology of Aging
#29
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 191,741 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.