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 |
Efficacy of Zolpidem for Dystonia: A Study Among Different Subtypes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2012.00058 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yoshimichi Miyazaki, Wataru Sako, Kotaro Asanuma, Yuishin Izumi, Tetsuro Miki, Ryuji Kaji |
| Abstract |
Although there are some newly developed options to treat dystonia, its medical treatment is not always satisfactory. Zolpidem, an imidazopyridine agonist with a high affinity on benzodiazepine subtype receptor BZ1 (ω1), was found to improve clinical symptoms of dystonia in a limited number of case reports. To investigate what subtype of dystonia is responsive to the therapy, we conducted an open label study to assess the efficacy of zolpidem (5-20 mg) in 34 patients suffering from miscellaneous types of dystonia using the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale (BFMDRS). Patients were entered into the study if they had been refractory to other medications as evaluated by BFMDRS (no change in the previous two successive visits). After zolpidem therapy, the scores in the patients as a whole were decreased from 7.2 ± 7.9 to 5.5 ± 5.0 (P = 0.042). Patients with generalized dystonia, Meige syndrome/blepharospasm, and hand dystonia improved in the scale by 27.8, 17.8, and 31.0%, respectively, whereas no improvement was found in cervical dystonia patients. Overall response rate among patients were comparable to that of trihexyphenidyl. Zolpidem may be a therapeutic option for generalized dystonia, Meige syndrome, and hand dystonia including musician's. Drowsiness was the dose-limiting factor. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| India | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 18% |
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 23% |
| Unknown | 6 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 46% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 November 2022.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#5,263
of 14,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,506
of 250,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#43
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,571 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 250,101 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 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 59% of its contemporaries.