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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Biological network inferences for a protection mechanism against familial Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease with E200K pathogenic mutation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Genomics, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1755-8794-7-52 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sol Moe Lee, Myungguen Chung, Kyu Jam Hwang, Young Ran Ju, Jae Wook Hyeon, Jun-Sun Park, Chi-Kyeong Kim, Sangho Choi, Jeongmin Lee, Su Yeon Kim |
| Abstract |
Human prion diseases are caused by abnormal accumulation of misfolded prion protein in the brain tissue. Inherited prion diseases, including familial Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (fCJD), are associated with mutations of the prion protein gene (PRNP). The glutamate (E)-to-lysine (K) substitution at codon 200 (E200K) in PRNP is the most common pathogenic mutation causing fCJD, but the E200K pathogenic mutation alone is regarded insufficient to cause prion diseases; thus, additional unidentified factors are proposed to explain the penetrance of E200K-dependent fCJD. Here, exome differences and biological network analysis between fCJD patients with E200K and healthy individuals, including a non-CJD individual with E200K, were analysed to gain new insights into possible mechanisms for CJD in individuals carrying E200K. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Luxembourg | 1 | 4% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 24 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 23% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 12% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 3 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 12% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 February 2015.
All research outputs
#14,783,695
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Genomics
#607
of 1,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,390
of 235,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Genomics
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,222 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 235,583 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.