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 |
High Degree of Heterogeneity in Alzheimer's Disease Progression Patterns
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Computational Biology, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002251 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalia L. Komarova, Craig J. Thalhauser |
| Abstract |
There have been several reports on the varying rates of progression among Alzheimer's Disease (AD) patients; however, there has been no quantitative study of the amount of heterogeneity in AD. Obtaining a reliable quantitative measure of AD progression rates and their variances among the patients for each stage of AD is essential for evaluating results of any clinical study. The Global Deterioration Scale (GDS) and Functional Assessment Staging procedure (FAST) characterize seven stages in the course of AD from normal aging to severe dementia. Each GDS/FAST stage has a published mean duration, but the variance is unknown. We use statistical analysis to reconstruct GDS/FAST stage durations in a cohort of 648 AD patients with an average follow-up time of 4.78 years. Calculations for GDS/FAST stages 4-6 reveal that the standard deviations for stage durations are comparable with their mean values, indicating the presence of large variations in the AD progression among patients. Such amount of heterogeneity in the course of progression of AD is consistent with the existence of several sub-groups of AD patients, which differ by their patterns of decline. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 100 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 25% |
| Researcher | 20 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 16 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 22 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 10% |
| Psychology | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 20% |
| Unknown | 17 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 10 August 2023.
All research outputs
#4,238,609
of 25,593,129 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#3,449
of 9,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,646
of 154,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#38
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,593,129 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,006 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
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 154,212 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.