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 |
Biomarkers in Inflammatory Myopathies—An Expanded Definition
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, June 2019
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2019.00554 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Olivier Benveniste, Hans-Hilmar Goebel, Werner Stenzel |
| Abstract |
Biomarkers as parameters of pathophysiological conditions can be of outmost relevance for inflammatory myopathies. They are particularly warranted to inform about diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic questions. As biomarkers become more and more relevant in daily routine, this review focusses on relevant aspects particularly addressing myopathological features. However, the level of evidence to use them in daily routine at presence is low, still since none of them has been validated in large cohorts of patients and rarely in independent biopsy series. Hence, they should be read as mere expert opinions. The evaluation of biomarkers as well as key biological parameters is an ongoing process, and we start learning about relevance of them, as we must recognize that pathophysiology of myositis is biologically incompletely understood. As such this approach should be considered an essay toward expansion of the definition "biomarker" to myositis, an emerging field of interest in biomedical research. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 20% |
| France | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 25% |
| Unknown | 13 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 35% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 16 | 31% |
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 06 July 2019.
All research outputs
#13,013,222
of 23,149,216 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#4,890
of 12,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,854
of 352,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#148
of 307 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,149,216 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 12,065 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 352,417 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 307 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 51% of its contemporaries.