↓ Skip to main content

Neurofibromatosis: part 2 – clinical management

Overview of attention for article published in Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Neurofibromatosis: part 2 – clinical management
Published in
Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria, June 2015
DOI 10.1590/0004-282x20150042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pollyanna Barros Batista, Eny Maria Goloni Bertollo, Danielle de Souza Costa, Lucas Eliam, Karin Soares Gonçalves Cunha, José Renan Cunha-Melo, Luiz Guilherme Darrigo Junior, Mauro Geller, Ingrid Faria Gianordoli-Nascimento, Luciana Gonçalves Madeira, Hérika Martins Mendes, Débora Marques de Miranda, Nikolas Andre Mata-Machado, Eric Grossi Morato, Érika Cristina Pavarino, Luciana Baptista Pereira, Nilton Alves de Rezende, Luíza de Oliveira Rodrigues, Jorge Bezerra Cavalcanti Sette, Carla Menezes da Silva, Juliana Ferreira de Souza, Márcio Leandro Ribeiro de Souza, Aline Stangherlin Martins, Eugênia Ribeiro Valadares, Paula Vieira Teixeira Vidigal, Vanessa Waisberg, Yehuda Waisberg, Luiz Oswaldo Carneiro Rodrigues

Abstract

Part 1 of this guideline addressed the differential diagnosis of the neurofibromatoses (NF): neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) and schwannomatosis (SCH). NF shares some features such as the genetic origin of the neural tumors and cutaneous manifestations, and affects nearly 80 thousand Brazilians. Increasing scientific knowledge on NF has allowed better clinical management and reduced rate of complications and morbidity, resulting in higher quality of life for NF patients. Most medical doctors are able to perform NF diagnosis, but the wide range of clinical manifestations and the inability to predict the onset or severity of new features, consequences, or complications make NF management a real clinical challenge, requiring the support of different specialists for proper treatment and genetic counseling, especially in NF2 and SCH. The present text suggests guidelines for the clinical management of NF, with emphasis on NF1.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 17 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 44%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Psychology 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 21 36%

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 June 2015.
All research outputs
#10,033,331
of 12,539,922 outputs
Outputs from Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria
#387
of 526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,300
of 234,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,539,922 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 526 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 234,242 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 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.