↓ Skip to main content

A Case of IL-7R Deficiency Caused by a Novel Synonymous Mutation and Implications for Mutation Screening in SCID Diagnosis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
A Case of IL-7R Deficiency Caused by a Novel Synonymous Mutation and Implications for Mutation Screening in SCID Diagnosis
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00443
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernando Gallego-Bustos, Valer Gotea, José T. Ramos-Amador, Rebeca Rodríguez-Pena, Juana Gil-Herrera, Ana Sastre, Aitor Delmiro, Ghadi Rai, Laura Elnitski, Luis I. González-Granado, Luis M. Allende

Abstract

Reported synonymous substitutions are generally non-pathogenic, and rare pathogenic synonymous variants may be disregarded unless there is a high index of suspicion. In a case of IL7 receptor deficiency severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), the relevance of a non-reported synonymous variant was only suspected through the use of additional in silico computational tools, which focused on the impact of mutations on gene splicing. The pathogenic nature of the variant was confirmed using experimental validation of the effect on mRNA splicing and IL7 pathway function. This case reinforces the need to use additional experimental methods to establish the functional impact of specific mutations, in particular for cases such as SCID where prompt diagnosis can greatly impact on diagnosis, treatment, and survival.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 10 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 10%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 17 November 2017.
All research outputs
#4,936,043
of 25,932,719 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#5,456
of 32,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,050
of 322,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#39
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,932,719 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,608 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 322,829 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 213 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.