↓ Skip to main content

The Genetics of Reading Disability in an Often Excluded Sample: Novel Loci Suggested for Reading Disability in Rolandic Epilepsy

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
The Genetics of Reading Disability in an Often Excluded Sample: Novel Loci Suggested for Reading Disability in Rolandic Epilepsy
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0040696
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa J. Strug, Laura Addis, Theodore Chiang, Zeynep Baskurt, Weili Li, Tara Clarke, Huntley Hardison, Steven L. Kugler, David E. Mandelbaum, Edward J. Novotny, Steven M. Wolf, Deb K. Pal

Abstract

Reading disability (RD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder with genetic basis established in families segregating "pure" dyslexia. RD commonly occurs in neurodevelopmental disorders including Rolandic Epilepsy (RE), a complex genetic disorder. We performed genomewide linkage analysis of RD in RE families, testing the hypotheses that RD in RE families is genetically heterogenenous to pure dyslexia, and shares genetic influences with other sub-phenotypes of RE.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 5%
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 40 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 19%
Researcher 6 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 14%
Professor 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 6 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 26%
Neuroscience 6 14%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Psychology 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 9 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 28 September 2012.
All research outputs
#14,729,713
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#122,876
of 193,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,805
of 163,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,499
of 4,020 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 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 193,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 163,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,020 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.