↓ Skip to main content

Conotruncal heart defects and common variants in maternal and fetal genes in folate, homocysteine, and transsulfuration pathways

Overview of attention for article published in Birth Defects Research Part A: Clinical and Molecular Teratology, February 2014
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Conotruncal heart defects and common variants in maternal and fetal genes in folate, homocysteine, and transsulfuration pathways
Published in
Birth Defects Research Part A: Clinical and Molecular Teratology, February 2014
DOI 10.1002/bdra.23225
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We investigated the association between conotruncal heart defects (CTDs) and maternal and fetal single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 60 genes in the folate, homocysteine, and transsulfuration pathways. We also investigated whether periconceptional maternal folic acid supplementation modified associations between CTDs and SNPs

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.
Activity
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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Norway 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 43 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Professor 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Other 11 24%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 11%
Psychology 5 11%
Mathematics 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 8 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 15 July 2022.
All research outputs
#3,563,719
of 33,779,198 outputs
Outputs from Birth Defects Research Part A: Clinical and Molecular Teratology
#69
of 576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,522
of 266,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Birth Defects Research Part A: Clinical and Molecular Teratology
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,779,198 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 266,156 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.