↓ Skip to main content

Prospective study of muscle cramps in Charcot‐Marie‐Tooth disease

Overview of attention for article published in Muscle & Nerve, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Prospective study of muscle cramps in Charcot‐Marie‐Tooth disease
Published in
Muscle & Nerve, February 2015
DOI 10.1002/mus.24333
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Introduction: This study aims to assess the frequency, location, severity, duration, and fluctuation over time of muscle cramps in Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease (CMT). Methods: Inherited Neuropathies Consortium Contact Registry participants recorded the occurrence and characteristics of muscle cramps using an 11-question survey administered 3 times over 8 weeks. Results: 110 adult patients with CMT completed the survey. Weekly cramp frequency was 9.3 (SD 12.3), and 23% had daily muscle cramps. Twenty-two percent reported a significant impact on quality of life. Over 8 weeks, the daily frequency and severity of muscle cramps did not change significantly. Conclusions: Patients with CMT have muscle cramps that vary little over an 8 week period, and they may interfere with quality of life. These data may be useful in the planning of clinical trials of agents to treat adults with CMT-associated muscle cramps. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 4 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 47 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 %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Unspecified 3 6%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 15 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Unspecified 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 18 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 July 2015.
All research outputs
#9,272,179
of 27,949,145 outputs
Outputs from Muscle & Nerve
#1,111
of 3,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,141
of 375,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Muscle & Nerve
#12
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,949,145 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 375,169 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 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 69% of its contemporaries.