↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
19 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.
Article details
Title
Combining fetal sonography with genetic and allele pathogenicity studies to secure a neonatal diagnosis of Bardet–Biedl syndrome
Published in
Clinical Genetics, October 2012
DOI 10.1111/cge.12022
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) is a rare pediatric ciliopathy characterized by marked clinical variability and extensive genetic heterogeneity. Typical diagnosis of BBS is secured at a median of 9 years of age, and sometimes well into adolescence. Here, we report a patient in whom prenatal detection of increased nuchal fold, enlarged echogenic kidneys, and polydactyly prompted us to screen the most commonly mutated genes in BBS and the phenotypically and genetically overlapping ciliopathy, Meckel-Gruber syndrome (MKS). We identified the common Met390Arg mutation in BBS1 in compound heterozygosity with a novel intronic variant of unknown significance (VUS). Testing of mRNA harvested from primary foreskin fibroblasts obtained shortly after birth revealed the VUS to induce a cryptic splice site, which in turn led to a premature termination and mRNA degradation. To our knowledge, this is the earliest diagnosis of BBS in the absence of other affected individuals in the family, and exemplifies how combining clinical assessment with genetic and timely assays of variant pathogenicity can inform clinical diagnosis and assist with patient management in the prenatal and neonatal setting.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 21%
Student > Postgraduate 3 16%
Researcher 2 11%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 1 5%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 June 2013.
All research outputs
#16,904,913
of 24,858,211 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Genetics
#1,897
of 2,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,442
of 180,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Genetics
#12
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,858,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,584 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 180,787 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.