↓ Skip to main content

Phenotypic expansion and progression of SPATA7-associated retinitis pigmentosa

Overview of attention for article published in Documenta Ophthalmologica, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Phenotypic expansion and progression of SPATA7-associated retinitis pigmentosa
Published in
Documenta Ophthalmologica, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10633-018-9626-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jesse D. Sengillo, Winston Lee, Colleen G. Bilancia, Vaidehi Jobanputra, Stephen H. Tsang

Abstract

To report an unusual phenotype of retinitis pigmentosa (RP) caused by compound heterozygous mutations in SPATA7, and describe the progression over a two year follow-up period. Retrospective case study. A 63-year-old man with a long history of nyctalopia, progressive visual field constriction, and a recent subacute decrease in visual acuity of the left eye presented for evaluation of a suspected retinal degeneration. Multimodal retinal imaging and functional assessment with full-field electroretinogram suggested a severe rod-cone dysfunction masquerading as a choroideremia-like phenotype. A vitreous opacity was found to explain recent changes in the left eye and a 25-guage vitrectomy and membrane peel was performed, yielding no change in visual acuity. Whole-exome sequencing revealed compound heterozygous variants in SPATA7 that were predicted to be pathogenic. Compound heterozygous c.1100A > G, p.(Y367C) and c.1102_1103delCT, p.(L368Efs*4) variants in SPATA7 manifest as an unusual RP phenotype in this case, showing extensive choroidal sclerosis and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) atrophy with evidence of progression over two years on multimodal imaging.

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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 14%
Researcher 3 14%
Professor 2 10%
Student > Master 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 19%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Unknown 10 48%
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 15 February 2018.
All research outputs
#18,585,544
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from Documenta Ophthalmologica
#322
of 461 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#327,805
of 437,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Documenta Ophthalmologica
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 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 461 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 437,329 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.