↓ Skip to main content

Variants in CIB2 cause DFNB48 and not USH1J

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Genetics, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Variants in CIB2 cause DFNB48 and not USH1J
Published in
Clinical Genetics, February 2018
DOI 10.1111/cge.13170
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The genetic, mutational and phenotypic spectrum of deafness-causing genes shows great diversity and pleiotropy. The best examples are the group of genes, which when mutated can either cause non-syndromic hearing loss (NSHL) or the most common dual sensory impairment, Usher Syndrome (USH). Variants in the CIB2 gene have been previously reported to cause of hearing loss at the DFNB48 locus and deaf-blindness at the USH1J locus. In this study, we characterize the phenotypic spectrum in a multiethnic cohort with autosomal recessive non-syndromic hearing loss (ARNSHL) due to variants in the CIB2 gene. Of the 6 families we ascertained, 3 segregated novel loss-of-function variants, 2 families segregated missense variants (one novel) and 1 family segregated a previously reported pathogenic variant in trans with a frameshift variant. This report is the first to show that biallelic loss of function variants in CIB2 cause ARNSHL and not USH. In the era of precision medicine, providing the correct diagnosis (NSHL vs USH) is essential for patient care as it impacts potential intervention and prevention options for patients. Here we provide evidence disqualifying CIB2 as an USH-causing gene.

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 52 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 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Student > Master 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 25 48%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 27 52%
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 November 2017.
All research outputs
#21,879,071
of 24,411,829 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Genetics
#2,405
of 2,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#390,760
of 453,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Genetics
#66
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,411,829 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,549 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 453,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.