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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Newborn screening in southeastern Europe
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Genetics & Metabolism, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ymgme.2014.07.020 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Urh Groselj, Mojca Zerjav Tansek, Andraz Smon, Natalija Angelkova, Dana Anton, Ivo Baric, Maja Djordjevic, Lindita Grimci, Maria Ivanova, Adil Kadam, Vjosa Mulliqi Kotori, Hajrija Maksic, Oana Marginean, Otilia Margineanu, Olivera Milijanovic, Florentina Moldovanu, Mariana Muresan, Simona Murko, Michaela Nanu, Barbka Repic Lampret, Mira Samardzic, Vladimir Sarnavka, Aleksei Savov, Maja Stojiljkovic, Biljana Suzic, Radka Tincheva, Husref Tahirovic, Alma Toromanovic, Natalia Usurelu, Tadej Battelino |
| Abstract |
The aim of our study was to assess the current state of newborn screening (NBS) in the region of southeastern Europe, as an example of a developing region, focusing also on future plans. Responses were obtained from 11 countries. Phenylketonuria screening was not introduced in four of 11 countries, while congenital hypothyroidism screening was not introduced in three of them; extended NBS programs were non-existent. The primary challenges were identified. Implementation of NBS to developing countries worldwide should be considered as a priority. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Slovenia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hong Kong | 1 | 2% |
| Croatia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 28% |
| Unknown | 8 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 38% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 21% |
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 30 August 2014.
All research outputs
#17,313,103
of 25,411,814 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Genetics & Metabolism
#1,790
of 2,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,272
of 240,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Genetics & Metabolism
#15
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,411,814 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 2,386 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 240,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.