↓ Skip to main content

Síndrome de hipoventilación alveolar central congénita

Overview of attention for article published in Boletín médico del Hospital Infantil de México, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
Síndrome de hipoventilación alveolar central congénita
Published in
Boletín médico del Hospital Infantil de México, July 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.bmhimx.2015.07.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edwin Hernando Herrera-Flores, Alfredo Rodríguez-Tejada, Martha Margarita Reyes-Zúñiga, Martha Guadalupe Torres-Fraga, Armando Castorena-Maldonado, José Luis Carrillo-Alduenda

Abstract

Congenital central alveolar hypoventilation syndrome (CCAHS) is a rare sleep-related breathing disorder. Although increasingly frequently diagnosed in sleep clinics and pediatric pulmonology services, its epidemiology is not known. There are about 300 reported cases reported in the literature with an incidence of 1 case per 200,000 live births. CCAHS is characterized by alveolar hypoventilation that occurs or worsens during sleep and is secondary to a reduction/absence of the ventilatory response to hypercapnia and/or hypoxemia. In 90% of the cases it is due to a PARM-type mutation of the PHOX2B gene. Treatment includes mechanical ventilation and diaphragmatic pacemaker. If therapy is not initiated promptly the patient can evolve to chronic respiratory failure, pulmonary hypertension, cor pulmonale and death. In this paper we present three cases of CCAHS diagnosed, treated and followed up at the Sleep Disorders Clinic of the National Institute of Respiratory Diseases in Mexico. Early diagnosis is important to initiate ventilatory support so as to prevent any complications and to reduce mortality.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 14%
Researcher 1 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
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 19 July 2017.
All research outputs
#17,728,715
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Boletín médico del Hospital Infantil de México
#1
of 3 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,171
of 278,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Boletín médico del Hospital Infantil de México
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.6. This one scored the same or higher as 2 of them.
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 278,885 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them