↓ Skip to main content

Syndromic anorectal malformation associated with Holt–Oram syndrome, microcephaly, and bilateral corneal opacity: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
14 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.
Title
Syndromic anorectal malformation associated with Holt–Oram syndrome, microcephaly, and bilateral corneal opacity: a case report
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13256-016-1011-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Usang E. Usang, Thomas U. Agan, Akan W. Inyang, John-Daniel C. Emehute, Itam H. Itam

Abstract

The occurrence of an anorectal malformation with Holt-Oram syndrome, microcephaly, and bilateral corneal opacity is rare and to the best of our knowledge has not previously been reported in the literature. Hence, there is a need to document our experience in this case and learn as much as possible from it. We present the case of a Nigerian female neonate with a postnatal diagnosis of syndromic anorectal malformation associated with Holt-Oram syndrome, microcephaly, and bilateral corneal opacity. The infant had successful staged correction of her anorectal malformation but developed a metastatic Wilms' tumor and died before other corrective procedures could be instituted. An anorectal malformation is here reported to occur with Holt-Oram syndrome, an association that has not been reported previously. To enhance the prognosis and quality of life of children with syndromic anorectal malformation, prenatal ultrasound monitoring of high-risk pregnancies and expertise in prenatal detection of congenital anomalies are invaluable in antenatal care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 29%
Student > Master 4 29%
Researcher 2 14%
Unspecified 2 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 21%
Unspecified 2 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Other 2 14%

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 09 August 2016.
All research outputs
#9,071,166
of 11,329,665 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#934
of 1,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,403
of 264,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#32
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,329,665 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,684 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 264,861 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 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.