↓ Skip to main content

Shake the Disease. Georges Marinesco, Paul Blocq and the Pathogenesis of Parkinsonism, 1893

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, June 2016
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
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Shake the Disease. Georges Marinesco, Paul Blocq and the Pathogenesis of Parkinsonism, 1893
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnana.2016.00074
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sorin Hostiuc, Eduard Drima, Octavian Buda

Abstract

James Parkinson, in his "Essay on the Shaking Palsy" from 1817 described for the first time the disease that later on carried his name. Its anatomical substrate remained controversial for over 100 years. The first case that suggested the association between Parkinson's disease and substantia nigra was published in 1893 Blocq and Marinesco, two scientists who worked at Salpêtrière. The article described a 38 years-old man, with tuberculosis, who was admitted to the Charcot's neurological ward because he also showed signs of unilateral Parkinsonism. During the autopsy, the investigators found a tubercle that destroyed the right substantia nigra. As the patient had overactive reflexes on the left side and the symptomatology matched exactly the localization of the tumor, Blocq and Marinesco suggested the Parkinsonism to be more likely a complication of tuberculosis and not an incidental finding. In this article, we will discuss the contribution of these two authors to the elucidation of the pathology of Parkinson's disease, and highlight how even a single case report may play an essential role in the development of knowledge in biomedical sciences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 24%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Researcher 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 8 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 29%
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 24 June 2016.
All research outputs
#14,856,117
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#711
of 1,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,945
of 352,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#19
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. 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 352,727 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 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.