↓ Skip to main content
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 (94th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
94 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
Clinical-Genetic Associations in the Prospective Huntington at Risk Observational Study (PHAROS): Implications for Clinical Trials
Published in
JAMA Neurology, January 2016
DOI 10.1001/jamaneurol.2015.2736
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin Michael Biglan, Ira Shoulson, Karl Kieburtz, David Oakes, Elise Kayson, M. Aileen Shinaman, Hongwei Zhao, Megan Romer, Anne Young, Steven Hersch, Jack Penney, Karen Marder, Jane Paulsen, Kimberly Quaid, Eric Siemers, Caroline Tanner, William Mallonee, Greg Suter, Richard Dubinsky, Carolyn Gray, Martha Nance, Scott Bundlie, Dawn Radtke, Sandra Kostyk, Corrine Baic, James Caress, Francis Walker, Victoria Hunt, Christine O’Neill, Sylvain Chouinard, Stewart Factor, Timothy Greenamyre, Cathy Wood-Siverio, Jody Corey-Bloom, David Song, Guerry Peavy, Carol Moskowitz, Melissa Wesson, Ali Samii, Thomas Bird, Hillary Lipe, Karen Blindauer, Frederick Marshall, Carol Zimmerman, Jody Goldstein, Diana Rosas, Peter Novak, John Caviness, Charles Adler, Amy Duffy, Vicki Wheelock, Teresa Tempkin, David Richman, Lauren Seeberger, Roger Albin, Kelvin L. Chou, Brad Racette, Joel S. Perlmutter, Susan Perlman, Yvette Bordelon, Wayne Martin, Marguerite Wieler, Blair Leavitt, Lynn Raymond, Joji Decolongon, Lorne Clarke, Joseph Jankovic, Christine Hunter, Robert A. Hauser, Juan Sanchez-Ramos, Sarah Furtado, Oksana Suchowersky, Mary Lou Klimek, Mark Guttman, Rustom Sethna, Andrew Feigin, Marie Cox, Barbara Shannon, Alan Percy, Leon Dure, Madaline Harrison, William Johnson, Donald Higgins, Eric Molho, Constance Nickerson, Sharon Evans, Douglas Hobson, Carlos Singer, Nestor Galvez-Jimenez, Kathleen Shannon, Cynthia Comella, Christopher Ross, Marie H. Saint-Hilaire, Claudia Testa, Adam Rosenblatt, Penelope Hogarth, William Weiner, Peter Como, Rajeev Kumar, Candace Cotto, Julie Stout, Alicia Brocht, Arthur Watts, Shirley Eberly, Christine Weaver, Tatiana Foroud, James Gusella, Marcy MacDonald, Richard Myers, Stanley Fahn, Clifford Shults

Abstract

Identifying measures that are associated with the cytosine-adenine-guanine (CAG) expansion in individuals before diagnosis of Huntington disease (HD) has implications for designing clinical trials. To identify the earliest features associated with the motor diagnosis of HD in the Prospective Huntington at Risk Observational Study (PHAROS). A prospective, multicenter, longitudinal cohort study was conducted at 43 US and Canadian Huntington Study Group research sites from July 9, 1999, through December 17, 2009. Participants included 983 unaffected adults at risk for HD who had chosen to remain unaware of their mutation status. Baseline comparability between CAG expansion (≥37 repeats) and nonexpansion (<37 repeats) groups was assessed. All participants and investigators were blinded to individual CAG analysis. A repeated-measures analysis adjusting for age and sex was used to assess the divergence of the linear trend between the expanded and nonexpanded groups. Data were analyzed from April 27, 2010, to September 3, 2013. Huntington disease mutation status in individuals with CAG expansion vs without CAG expansion. Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale motor (score range, 0-124; higher scores indicate greater impairment), cognitive (symbol digits modality is the total number of correct responses in 90 seconds; lower scores indicate greater impairment), behavioral (score range, 0-176; higher scores indicate greater behavioral symptoms), and functional (Total Functional Capacity score range, 0-13; lower scores indicate reduced functional ability) domains were assessed at baseline and every 9 months up to a maximum of 10 years. Among the 983 research participants at risk for HD in the longitudinal cohort, 345 (35.1%) carried the CAG expansion and 638 (64.9%) did not. The mean (SD) duration of follow-up was 5.8 (3.0) years. At baseline, participants with expansions had more impaired motor (3.0 [4.2] vs 1.9 [2.8]; P < .001), cognitive (P < .05 for all measures except Verbal Fluency, P = .52), and behavioral domain scores (9.4 [11.4] vs 6.5 [8.5]; P < .001) but not significantly different measures of functional capacity (12.9 [0.3] vs 13.0 [0.2]; P = .23). With findings reported as mean slope (95% CI), in the longitudinal analyses, participants with CAG expansions showed significant worsening in motor (0.84 [0.73 to 0.95] vs 0.03 [-0.05 to 0.11]), cognitive (-0.54 [-0.67 to -0.40] vs 0.22 [0.12 to 0.32]), and functional (-0.08 [-0.09 to -0.06] vs -0.01 [-0.02 to 0]) measures compared with those without expansion (P < .001 for all); behavioral domain scores did not diverge significantly between groups. Using these prospectively accrued clinical data, relatively large treatment effects would be required to mount a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial involving premanifest HD individuals who carry the CAG expansion.

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.
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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
Unknown 92 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Researcher 10 11%
Other 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 19 20%
Unknown 32 34%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 17%
Psychology 11 12%
Neuroscience 9 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 38 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 01 October 2021.
All research outputs
#1,791,406
of 33,695,692 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Neurology
#1,701
of 3,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,055
of 444,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Neurology
#34
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,695,692 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,668 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 77.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 444,418 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 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 55% of its contemporaries.