↓ Skip to main content

A novel mutation in VCP causes Charcot–Marie–Tooth Type 2 disease

Overview of attention for article published in Brain, August 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 (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
A novel mutation in VCP causes Charcot–Marie–Tooth Type 2 disease
Published in
Brain, August 2014
DOI 10.1093/brain/awu224
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Mutations in VCP have been reported to account for a spectrum of phenotypes that include inclusion body myopathy with Paget's disease of the bone and frontotemporal dementia, hereditary spastic paraplegia, and 1-2% of familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. We identified a novel VCP mutation (p.Glu185Lys) segregating in an autosomal dominant Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 2 family. Functional studies showed that the Glu185Lys variant impaired autophagic function leading to the accumulation of immature autophagosomes. VCP mutations should thus be considered for genetically undefined Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 2.

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 profiles of 9 X users 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 111 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 %
United States 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 108 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 27%
Researcher 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Student > Master 7 6%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 22 20%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 22%
Neuroscience 16 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 14%
Chemistry 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 23 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 07 November 2024.
All research outputs
#6,339,552
of 34,167,806 outputs
Outputs from Brain
#4,658
of 9,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,921
of 275,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain
#33
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,167,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.7. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 275,090 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 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 61% of its contemporaries.