↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the quality of studies supporting genetic susceptibility and outcomes of ARDS

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Assessing the quality of studies supporting genetic susceptibility and outcomes of ARDS
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2014.00020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marialbert Acosta-Herrera, Maria Pino-Yanes, Lina Perez-Mendez, Jesús Villar, Carlos Flores

Abstract

The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a severe inflammatory disease manifested as a result of pulmonary and systemic responses to several insults. It is now well accepted that genetic variation influences these responses. However, little is known about the genes that are responsible for patient susceptibility and outcome of ARDS. Methodological flaws are still abundant among genetic association studies with ARDS and here, we aimed to highlight the quality criteria where the standards have not been reached, to expose the associated genes to facilitate replication attempts, and to provide quick-reference guidance for future studies. We conducted a PubMed search from January 2008 to September 2012 for original articles. Studies were considered if a statistically significant association was declared with either susceptibility or outcomes of all-cause ARDS. Fourteen criteria were used for evaluation and results were compared to those from a previous quality assessment report. Significant improvements affecting study design and statistical analysis were detected. However, major issues such as adjustments for the underlying population stratification and replication studies remain poorly addressed.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 18%
Other 2 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 18%
Chemical Engineering 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 7 41%
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 06 February 2014.
All research outputs
#23,084,818
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#9,672
of 13,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#282,601
of 321,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#46
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,783 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 321,186 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.