| Title |
Evidence‐based path to newborn screening for duchenne muscular dystrophy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Neurology, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/ana.23528 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jerry R. Mendell, Chris Shilling, Nancy D. Leslie, Kevin M. Flanigan, Roula al‐Dahhak, Julie Gastier‐Foster, Kelley Kneile, Diane M. Dunn, Brett Duval, Alexander Aoyagi, Cindy Hamil, Maha Mahmoud, Kandice Roush, Lauren Bird, Chelsea Rankin, Heather Lilly, Natalie Street, Ram Chandrasekar, Robert B. Weiss |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 484 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 479 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 74 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 67 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 60 | 12% |
| Researcher | 53 | 11% |
| Other | 33 | 7% |
| Other | 80 | 17% |
| Unknown | 117 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 90 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 80 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 72 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 30 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 15 | 3% |
| Other | 65 | 13% |
| Unknown | 132 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 19 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,976,115
of 24,629,540 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Neurology
#914
of 5,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,290
of 164,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Neurology
#7
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,629,540 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,556 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 164,501 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.